181 replies to this topic

[TyGuy]

I've also use one of these sometimes. My favorite part is that I put together a custom first aid kit, sutures included, and carry it in the versapack.  I've already used it once to tread a bleeding head wound until the paramedics arrived.  I like that it gives me space to carry a defensive firearms AND first aid gear.

[pyre400]

TyGuy, on 06 June 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

the versapack.

Versapack?  That things a backpack with one strap and molle on the top
Its good to be prepared.

[TyGuy]

Be warned, the video contains the F-word.

[mikew]

Is that a fanny pack?

http://www.spike.com...at-a-fanny-pack

[JackTripper]

This thing is awesome. Just add plates

[TyGuy]

I've seen that before Jack.  I guess it has its place.

[JackTripper]

TyGuy, on 06 June 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

I guess it has its place.

Yeah. The West side of Chicago

Edited by JackTripper, 06 June 2012 - 10:28 AM.

[junglebob]

C0untZer0, on 06 June 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

It's hard for me to take something seriously when it has the word "fanny" in it.

It they would call them Tac-Packs I would be all-in.  That's cool sounding.

But fanny pack is not cool sounding, and besides - I don't want a fanny.  Wearing a fanny pack is an admission that you have a fanny and I don't want a fanny.  When people look at me from behind I just want them to think "that guy works out..."  I don't want them to think "Wow look at that fanny - it's holding up a fanny pack."

How about calling it a "waist pack".   I certainly don't wear my Uncle Mikes Sidekick pack on my butt.  That would make it a little unhandy to get to.  BTW, it is black but I've worn it for years and LEOs haven't taken any serious notice of it, that I know of.

[TyGuy]

[kurt555gs]

I no longer wonder why we don't have concealed carry here. I try to raise the point that we as a whole must stand up for the laws we have and not let those in power with an agenda contrary to ours make their own laws and bully those that carefully obeys the laws as written. I get people here ranting that Container Transport is ineffective.  No kidding? Or some such no tactical advantage. I know. Or other issues that lead away from the problem that I was trying to address which is Illinois law says we can transport and unloaded, cased firearm except in prohibited areas and in home rule communities that have local ordinances preventing it. If anti civil rights cops or states attorneys want to bully us with their authority of office knowing full well that Illinois law gives us the right to transport our firearms wherever legal WITHOUT giving any reason other than we want to. We as a community, and   the rights organizations should NOT tolerate this and be very vocal in their support.

If we allow official bullying on this, what other rights will we allow the anti's to take away. Even when the law is clear and on our side?

[pyre400]

kurt555gs, on 06 June 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

If we allow official bullying on this, what other rights will we allow the anti's to take away. Even when the law is clear and on our side?

You make a point.  People do operate on fear, quite well.  Unfortunately, we already have succumbed bullying, long ago.
Again, its been incremental, and its unreasonable to expect things to change over night.  Your topic is a good one, and I'm sure many will choose to container transport.
Still, sometimes, guerrilla tactics are more effective than taking the enemy head on. Especially when your enemy has exponentially more resources than you do.  I'd rather make collective, strategic attacks, rather than trying to take the state's legal war chest on.

Dont let the people who argue about the effectiveness discourage you.  If a law passed, explicitly stating that the only legal means to carry a loaded weapon was if it was enclosed in a fanny pack, then I'm sure most of us would be wearing them - I know I would.

There's just too much room right now, in current law, for officer "discretion" - IMO

[kurt555gs]

Pyre400. I don't read any discretion in the laws at all.

Unloaded and enclosed in a case. Where is there wiggle room inn that sentence? And if your "case" is an Uncle Mikes, or Maxpedition that is specifically designed to house a firearm, then even the more nebulous Wildlife Code is covered. Period!

* Carthago Delenda Est *

[TyGuy]

I think he means the wiggle room due to whether or not an officer will arrest you.

[pyre400]

kurt555gs, on 06 June 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

Pyre400. I don't read any discretion in the laws at all.

Unloaded and enclosed in a case. Where is there wiggle room inn that sentence? And if your "case" is an Uncle Mikes, or Maxpedition that is specifically designed to house a firearm, then even the more nebulous Wildlife Code is covered. Period!

If you were the head of law enforcement, based on your expressed understanding of the law, I wouldnt have a problem.  Unfortunately, law enforcement is not as aware of the law as you are.  So this leaves me, and my pocket book, subject to the whims of whichever LEO I may be dealing with, should something happen.

[kurt555gs]

Then, maybe we, and our rights groups should be educating the LE community. And putting those that would violate our rights on notice that we are watching them.

* Carthago Delenda Est *

[pyre400]

kurt555gs, on 06 June 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:

Then, maybe we, and our rights groups should be educating the LE community. And putting those that would violate our rights on notice that we are watching them.

* Carthago Delenda Est *

Yes
Village Presidents, Mayors
County Boards
County Sheriffs
Municipal police
State's Attorneys

My attempts were met with polite opposition, with the exception of my SA.  My SA was unopposed - it seems that votes are the only way to influence those guys.
The issue, according to those I've talked with is, again, that the container transport is a technicality.  "They" dont really feel comfortable with that - what would be nice is if someone would step up like in March of 2009 when WI said that open carry was not illegal.

In my neck of the woods, I have support for the passing of RTC, just not the fanny packing, or console transport (vehicle).

[Unanimous]

kurt555gs, on 06 June 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

Pyre400. I don't read any discretion in the laws at all.

Unloaded and enclosed in a case. Where is there wiggle room inn that sentence? And if your "case" is an Uncle Mikes, or Maxpedition that is specifically designed to house a firearm, then even the more nebulous Wildlife Code is covered. Period!

* Carthago Delenda Est *

the wiggle room comes in the individual interpretation of what transport is - NOT the carrying case itself.

If you don't understand this or think this is by accident I truly feel bad for you

The sheeple in this state succumbed to the bullying long ago so there's no point is chastizing anyone over it now

[ckmorley]

TyGuy, on 06 June 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

I've also use one of these sometimes. My favorite part is that I put together a custom first aid kit, sutures included, and carry it in the versapack.  I've already used it once to tread a bleeding head wound until the paramedics arrived.  I like that it gives me space to carry a defensive firearms AND first aid gear.

I have one too.
BUT...... there was one time Downtown Chgo a wino sees it and yells, "that looks milatary... what's in there ?"

ckmorley

Edited by ckmorley, 10 June 2012 - 02:22 AM.

[kurt555gs]

CK. That's a Maxpedition Versa-Pack Jumbo. Just what I use to transport my 1911 in Illinois, and carry it in free states. I highly recommend it.

* Carthago Delenda Est *

[ckmorley]

kurt555gs, on 10 June 2012 - 07:51 AM, said:

CK. That's a Maxpedition Versa-Pack Jumbo. Just what I use to transport my 1911 in Illinois, and carry it in free states. I highly recommend it.

* Carthago Delenda Est *

I have one. It's my second one. The first was never returned after my arrest in sept of '09.
Thesedays I prefer a paddle holster or shoulder holster.
ckmorley

[Mr. Fife]

Tvandermyde, on 03 June 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

Mr. Fife, dont forget about 21-6 unlawful possession on public land...navy peir is public land

Laws have to make sense. I think that it could be argued that when fishing with a gun is an exception to UUW and AUUW on public property, than the 21-6 Class A misdemeanor law makes no sense if you apply it to someone fishing with a gun.

One has to assume that if the lawmakers wrote a law that exempts fishermen, they intended for it to be legal, otherwise why even mention it? While I don't want to be a test case (because of the fines and jail time), I think a case like this if challenged would be quite interesting. I'm guessing it would never see a courtroom though.

[Silverbull3t]

The issues I see with Fanny Pack transport are 1:dubious legality. State law says its kosher, but the local home rule laws all but ruin that. Some communities have some truly weird laws on the books-Vernon Hills last I checked has a law requiring all guns in city limits to have locks in their trigger guards or actions. There aren't any exemptions for transport, so if you carry a cased gun without a lock -even if its in your car's trunk =violation of local law and a UUW charge.

Two, its useless for personal defense in this configuration. By the time you spot Gangsta G coming at you with his loaded pistol he'll have shot you, gone to court , filed an appeal, and been released early for 'good behavior'  before you even clear the case.

[TyGuy]

Silverbull3t, on 22 June 2012 - 09:50 AM, said:

Two, its useless for personal defense in this configuration. By the time you spot Gangsta G coming at you with his loaded pistol he'll have shot you, gone to court , filed an appeal, and been released early for 'good behavior'  before you even clear the case.

AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN it won't help if directly confronted, but hey even CC or OC isn't always helpful.  It WOULD help in shootings like Brown's Chicken, NIU, Lane Bryant, etc....  I'd rather be able to address some instances than be totally unarmed.

[RandyP]

I guess my 'objection' to fanny pack "transport" is based on what I expect to be the response if the transporter were asked "Transporting your firearm on foot from where to where?"

You are walking to or from the range or gun shoppe? On a long hike out of State? Walking your gun to show a friend down the street? Or do you simply strap the thing to yer butt every day and CARRY it everywhere you go till you get back home? In which case you are IMHO not complying with the laws of legitimate 'transport' but rather are engaged in testing the outer limits or skirting the intent of the laws on the books. Carrying is carrying and we need to get it made legal, not 'weasel word' around the issue.

[05FLHT]

RandyP, on 22 June 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

I guess my 'objection' to fanny pack "transport" is based on what I expect to be the response if the transporter were asked "Transporting your firearm on foot from where to where?"

I am not for or against FPC/FPT, however, a good response would be 'everywhere I am lawfully able to.' There is no statutory requirement that the firearm be transported to or from any specific location. To comply with the UUW/Ag UUW statute, the firearm simply needs to be unloaded and enclosed in a case.

[TyGuy]

Actually if you read the law and court cases that have used the law you will discover that the law does not require you to transport from any particular location to another.  I am fairly certain I already addressed that point with the pertinent case earlier in this thread.

[TyGuy]

Yup, here you go: http://www.concealca...nois-vs-bruner/

Important excerpt from the judge:  

Quote

The best indication of legislative intent is the language of the exemption as adopted. Even allowing for the strict construction of the exemption provided in section 24-2(i), the legislature intended the exemption to apply not only to transporting a gun, as in the situation {*44} of purchasing a gun and transporting it home or transporting a hunting rifle to the location of the hunt, but to also apply to the carrying and possession of a gun while simply walking down the street.  We agree with the trial court the exemption “may allow for mischief.”  However, it clearly applies to defendant because her pistol was unloaded, in a case and she had a valid FOID card. The exemption did not require her to be transporting the pistol to a specific location in order to hunt or target shoot or take a recently purchased weapon to her residence.

[TyGuy]

I'm not saying YOU or anyone else should do it, but it is legal, subject to local ordinances.  Will you get arrested if you are discovered?  Probably, but people are arrested for following the law from time to time.  Just look north to Wisconsin's battle for CC and you'll see many cases of people wrongly being arrested while OCing.  Is it a replacement for CC or OC?  NO.  Is it better than nothing?  Yes, as it allows you to respond to some circumstances.

Only you can prevent forest fires and only you can decide if container transport, CC, or OC is something you want to do.

[junglebob]

TyGuy, on 22 June 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

I'm not saying YOU or anyone else should do it, but it is legal, subject to local ordinances.  Will you get arrested if you are discovered?  Probably, but people are arrested for following the law from time to time.  Just look north to Wisconsin's battle for CC and you'll see many cases of people wrongly being arrested while OCing.  Is it a replacement for CC or OC?  NO.  Is it better than nothing?  Yes, as it allows you to respond to some circumstances.

Only you can prevent forest fires and only you can decide if container transport, CC, or OC is something you want to do.

So what would Smokey Bear advise.   Well he never said to never make a fire because fires destroy forests.  He is an advocate of using fire responsibly so I think he would favor citizens lawfully carrying or contrainer transporting.  He is smarter than some Chicago politicians, I believe.   Their remedy for preventing forest fires would be to ban fire.

[TyGuy]

And I container transport.  I am notmagainst it.  I'm saying each person chas to make their informed choice.