Jump to content


Photo

URGENT Legislative 12/31/12

Senate to Push Gun and Mag ba

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
195 replies to this topic

#181 billzfx4

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,224 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 08

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:25 PM

I still want to know exactly how the heck one is supposed to 'register' a magazine.
Don't mistake my kindness for weakness. I am kind to everyone, but when someone is unkind to me, weak is not what you are going to remember about me.

#182 pyre400

    Political opinions expressed are always my own.

  • Admin
  • 7,728 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 09

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:25 PM

Class 4 felony for any unlawful ownership of magazines (loading devices) in excess of 10 rounds. Required registration... Only FFL's can own such devices... Sets forth a "large feeding device" leasing program, where you can rent a magazine from the range LOL... What the hey!!!..

Based on "unusually dangerous" language from Heller and McDonald. Typically gibberish that has been spewed during the court cases. Ridiculous.

__________________
R[∃vo˩]ution


#183 pyre400

    Political opinions expressed are always my own.

  • Admin
  • 7,728 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 09

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:27 PM

I still want to know exactly how the heck one is supposed to 'register' a magazine.


Serial numbers? Maybe they have a cartouche, with a crooked cross on it, that they'll use to emboss existing magazines.

__________________
R[∃vo˩]ution


#184 45superman

    Member

  • Senior Member
  • 9,128 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:28 PM

I'm absolutely disgusted. They amended a bill that would put restrictions on ranges to include the ownership, sale, and use of "high-capacity" magazines?!? That has nothing to do with it!!!


Actually, it's worse than that. The bill's original intent was to enhance nuclear safety. Kotowski has decided that 11 round magazines are more dangerous than sloppily run nuclear power plants.
My gun rights blog
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner
NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA, SAF, GOA and JPFO Life Member

#185 xbaltzx

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 306 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 08

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:28 PM

This is only for magazines capable of more than 10 rounds??? Not "assault weapons"?

#186 Talonap

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,309 posts
  • Joined: 12-July 08

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:29 PM

guys quit posting the names of people with their repsonces.

all you do is give the otherside a roll call to work without havignto do the leg work


But I really appreciate the info, because it saves me the legwork too!


How does it save you legwork? Are you saying you are here to inform to, "The Dark Side".

#187 pyre400

    Political opinions expressed are always my own.

  • Admin
  • 7,728 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 09

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:30 PM

This is only for magazines capable of more than 10 rounds??? Not "assault weapons"?

I was thinking that too. There must be more eggs hidden somewhere.

__________________
R[∃vo˩]ution


#188 45superman

    Member

  • Senior Member
  • 9,128 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:34 PM

Ah--you guys are right. I got ahead of myself. This is apparently a standalone magazine ban bill. The other stuff is happening elsewhere.

Sorry for the confusion.
My gun rights blog
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner
NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA, SAF, GOA and JPFO Life Member

#189 Jeckler

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,471 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 11

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:35 PM

OK, looks like Senator Dan Kotowski has filed an amendment to HB 815. The text of the amendment is an all-out assualt on "assault weapons," "high capacity magazines," .50 caliber guns, etc.


Utterly disgusting.

#190 snooter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 825 posts
  • Joined: 16-November 07

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:37 PM

a class 4 felony for a mag?...damn your better off selling drugs on the street corner or pimping out womenz..best you get for that is some counseling and scolding by the judge that you never do that again..oh what the heck soon we will have legal dope smoking clubs and honest illinois people in jail for having a standard capacity mag..how ironic its become

#191 45superman

    Member

  • Senior Member
  • 9,128 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:00 PM

There is now an amendment to HB 1263, banning "assault weapons" and .50 caliber firearms and ammo. It's Senate Amendment #5, filed by Antonio Muñoz.

Also, Muñoz has filed an amendmnet to HB 1237, that looks as if it's intended to make it easier for cops who have been ruled mentally ill to get their guns back--because a crazy person with guns is only dangerous if he/she is not a cop, I guess. The amendment is Senate Amendment #6.
My gun rights blog
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner
NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA, SAF, GOA and JPFO Life Member

#192 XtremeRevolution

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 01-January 13

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:07 PM

Don't forget, in HB1263...an assault weapon is also considered:

"a semi-automatic rifle or a pistol with the
capacity to accept a detachable magazine, a muzzle
brake, or muzzle compensator;"

#193 45superman

    Member

  • Senior Member
  • 9,128 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:50 PM

So what do folks think the point of Senate Amendment #6 to HB 1263 is about--making SA# 5 a bit more palatable, and thus more easily passed?
My gun rights blog
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner
NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA, SAF, GOA and JPFO Life Member

#194 Xwing

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,854 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 09

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:55 PM

Room 409: They are talking now... Audio is live.

NRA Lifetime Member
IGOLD 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018
CCW - 50 State Firearm Laws: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Posted anti-gun business listing: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Gun Range Tools & Logs: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Illinois Government: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)


#195 Capt_Destro

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,725 posts
  • Joined: 20-August 12

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:01 PM

© This Section does not apply to a person who possessed a 16 weapon or attachment prohibited by subsection (B) before 17 January 1, 2014, provided that the person has provided proof of 18 ownership, his or her name, and other identifying information 19 to the Department of State Police, as required by the 20 Department, within 90 days after January 1, 2014. On or after 21 January 1, 2014, the person may transfer the weapon or 22 attachment only to an heir, an individual residing in another 23 state maintaining that weapon in another state, or a dealer 24 licensed as a federal firearms dealer under Section 923 of the 25 federal Gun Control Act of 1968. Within 10 days after transfer 26 of the weapon or attachment, the person shall notify the

09700HB1263sam005 - 12 - LRB097 07183 JWD 73033 a 1 Department of State Police of the name and address of the 2 transferee and comply with the requirements of subsection (B) 3 of Section 3 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. The 4 Department shall promulgate any rules it may deem necessary to 5 carry out the provisions of this subsection, including the 6 establishment of fees charged and collected for collecting and 7 maintaining the information required to be provided under this 8 subsection.


Why do we have to give the ISP the out of state info of the transferee? It basically feels like a registration of some kind..
When picking a firearm, you want one that is like a heavy chick. A gun that is reliable, doesn't mind getting rough, and one that goes bang every time. What's the point of having something pretty looking it isn't up for the task?

#196 Mr. Fife

    Nip it

  • Members
  • 3,913 posts
  • Joined: 03-July 10

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:11 PM

Go Todd
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?