JustOld Posted April 29, 2017 at 02:23 AM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 02:23 AM I just wonder what actually happens if some one forgets and gets caught carrying? Do they arrest you, call the police or just run screaming like their hair is on fire? My theory is that this happens very rarely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted April 29, 2017 at 03:22 AM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 03:22 AM I don't know of any licensed carriers being caught in a posted location. It is a misdemeanor so I would bet on at least getting arrested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spec5 Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:20 AM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:20 AM Interesting first post. Asking if somebody's doing something illegal with your first post is very interesting. Welcome to the forum. You're thread title question is different than the questions in your thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt_Destro Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:51 AM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:51 AM Would anyone admit to it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottFM Posted April 29, 2017 at 01:02 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 01:02 PM I haven't been caught, but I did realize I walked into a zone without noticing it was posted no CCW. It was a coffee shop and had anyone noticed that under my jacket and shirt I had a CC, I would have apologized for not seeing the sign and left. No reason to start an argument when I was obviously in the wrong. Hopefully that would have been enough. I think if people put up and attitude that is when the police get called and you will be charged. But this is all predicated on being seen in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted April 29, 2017 at 01:13 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 01:13 PM Yes. There was a lady in Bureau County that CC'd into the court house. She was arrested and charged, but the SA dropped the charges later. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windermere Posted April 29, 2017 at 03:36 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 03:36 PM Who would catch you? It's CONCEALED carry for a reason. Spot on! Couldn't have said it better myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matkinson Posted April 29, 2017 at 03:50 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 03:50 PM Not long after receiving my CCL I walked into a store that was posted. They had the right sticker but it was completely blocked from view by a freestanding sign advertising some sale of theirs. I saw the sign once I was past the glass door and left immediately. I haven't spent a dime in that store since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vactor Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:08 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:08 PM Yes. i represented a person who was on CTA property and had a CCL and found in possession of his firearm. They were arrested, charged and prosecuted. case took 8 months to dispose of. Even though they were described as incredibly polite, there was no benefit given. the police and the prosecutor will treat you the same as any person accused of a crime, and vigorously prosecute you as hard as they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:08 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 04:08 PM Who would catch you? It's CONCEALED carry for a reason. Spot on! Couldn't have said it better myself. It would still be detectable by a metal detector. Unexpected things happen. A person trips and falls and part of the gun is exposed. Person has a heart attack and survives and gun is discovered during CPR at scene or later at the hospital. Woman opens purse at store to pay and pistol is seen. You legitimately deploy your weapon to protect yourself or a loved one while in a no-guns area. All rare occurrences, but still possible. Whether prosecution would result is another question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab Posted April 29, 2017 at 05:09 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 05:09 PM I work in a state mandated GFZ. About a year ago a guest was spotted carrying by another guest. Police were called. In the end he was escorted to the public sidewalk. His gun was returned to him with a stern warning from the police. Police said the signs were not conspicuous enough to be enforced even though it was state mandated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustOld Posted April 29, 2017 at 06:27 PM Author Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 06:27 PM I had asked the same question on AR-15 Illinois and was directed to ask here. I asked the question because we have been discussing this at our local GSL. I strongly suspect that many building owners are ignorant of the law and don't know what to do. My own church put up the signs at the direction of the minister who told the trustees they were "required" to put them up, thereby circumventing the trustees of which I was a member. When I objected, I was strongly encouraged to leave, which I did. I filed a complaint with the appropriate committee, but was ignored. Some people laughed at me, and told me that me and my concerns were not important. I have since learned that several local carriers claim to carry in no gun zones anyway, unless there is a metal detectors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseeker Posted April 29, 2017 at 06:48 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 06:48 PM I would say that if you didn't knowingly carry it (eg. Accidentally forgot that you had it with you or didn't realize that you were in a gfz), you broke no illinois law. I'm sure that you could still possibly be arrested and charged but the SA would have to prove intent Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted April 29, 2017 at 11:52 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 11:52 PM Yes It happens quite a bit actually. The Chicago Data Portal tracks it as "Concealed Carry License Violation - Prohibited Places" https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-present/ijzp-q8t2/data Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted April 29, 2017 at 11:58 PM Share Posted April 29, 2017 at 11:58 PM There are even some interesting cases where people have been arrested for Concealed Carry License Violation - Armed While Under the Influence, and the locations are listed as "Residence, Apartment, and Porch" I'm wondering if those people were arrested at a party at someone else's home or what... it wouldn't make sense to be arrested on your own porch for concealed carry while drunk, but with Chicago - you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseeker Posted April 30, 2017 at 01:01 AM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 01:01 AM Yes It happens quite a bit actually. The Chicago Data Portal tracks it as "Concealed Carry License Violation - Prohibited Places" https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-present/ijzp-q8t2/data Oustide of a couple of cti busses, the rest were at airport terminals...And most or all of those could have very well been federal permits. Otherwise, the issue seems to be pretty much nonexistent Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangrel Posted April 30, 2017 at 01:28 AM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 01:28 AM Yes It happens quite a bit actually. The Chicago Data Portal tracks it as "Concealed Carry License Violation - Prohibited Places" https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-present/ijzp-q8t2/dataOustide of a couple of cti busses, the rest were at airport terminals...And most or all of those could have very well been federal permits. Otherwise, the issue seems to be pretty much nonexistent Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Federal permits? When did that get passed? Perhaps you mean out-of-state permits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseeker Posted April 30, 2017 at 02:12 AM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 02:12 AM Yes It happens quite a bit actually. The Chicago Data Portal tracks it as "Concealed Carry License Violation - Prohibited Places" https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-present/ijzp-q8t2/data Oustide of a couple of cti busses, the rest were at airport terminals...And most or all of those could have very well been federal permits. Otherwise, the issue seems to be pretty much nonexistent Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Federal permits? When did that get passed? Perhaps you mean out-of-state permits. I was referring to those who are qualified to carry under federal law (retired law enforcement, certain retired military, ect, ect...) Wasn't sure that an out of state permit would fall under 'conceald carry license violation - prohibited places'...As an out of state license would not be recognized in illinois...But I suppose it may, since I believe they can carry concealed in their own vehicles Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomKoz Posted April 30, 2017 at 03:21 AM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 03:21 AM Yes It happens quite a bit actually. The Chicago Data Portal tracks it as "Concealed Carry License Violation - Prohibited Places" https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-present/ijzp-q8t2/data Oustide of a couple of cti busses, the rest were at airport terminals...And most or all of those could have very well been federal permits.Otherwise, the issue seems to be pretty much nonexistentSent from my SM-N900P using TapatalkFederal permits? When did that get passed? Perhaps you mean out-of-state permits.Federal Permit = 2nd Amendment !! Plain & Simple - "... shall not be infringed. " DON'T stop the fight!! STOP giving in to the antis !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted April 30, 2017 at 04:23 AM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 04:23 AM There is no indication in the data that the people who were arrested at the airports were pilots, retired LEO, federal permits or people just getting nicked at the airport carrying their firearm. Since 2014, if you don't count airports, there have been the following arrests for Concealed Carry License Violation - Prohibited Places, in Chicago: 1 bar or tavern1 hotel / motel1 restaurant1 CTA Bus2 park property1 CTA train And remember - this is just for the City of Chicago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoadyRunner Posted April 30, 2017 at 03:57 PM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 03:57 PM I wonder how many were licensees that had switched to transport, but were proseduted anyway, but didn't have the money or contacts to fight it. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carry Posted April 30, 2017 at 07:16 PM Share Posted April 30, 2017 at 07:16 PM Interesting data. Is there a north side / south side difference or bias? On the north side, looks like armed under influence occurs more often late in the evening or early in the morning. On the south side maybe a little more likely to be arrested armed under the influence in the morning or afternoon, maybe not near a bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soylentgreen Posted May 1, 2017 at 03:45 PM Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 03:45 PM As was stated, it's a misdemeanor...and your experience with law enforcement and the prosecutor's office may vary. The police may simply remove you from the place and give you a warning. They may arrest you. The prosecutor may drop the charges...he may prosecute the heck out of you. There's just no way to tell. It probably has a lot to do with the cop's mood, your level of combativeness, whether the cop is pro-gun, etc. The prosecutor's office is the same. What's their workload? Where does your case fall in the pecking order? How does the prosecutor feel about guns? Is he looking to make a name for himself?The prosecutor isn't going to go after you unless he thinks it's a case he can win. He wants a record of convictions. If you're a CCL holder and you're in a CLEARLY marked location, it's a slam-dunk for him. My guess if the location is one known by statute to be off-limits, you're more likely to be prosecuted. If the location is a school, my guess is you've got a 100% likelyhood of having a court date...ESPECIALLY in Cook County.So, if you're knowingly carrying in a GFZ, you're taking a chance. What's the likelihood you'll be spotted? What's the likelyhood someone will call 911? What's the likelihood that the cop will decide to arrest? What's the likelihood that the prosecutor will press charges? What's the likelihood that you'll be convicted? No one knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vactor Posted May 1, 2017 at 06:58 PM Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 06:58 PM As was stated, it's a misdemeanor...and your experience with law enforcement and the prosecutor's office may vary. The police may simply remove you from the place and give you a warning. They may arrest you. The prosecutor may drop the charges...he may prosecute the heck out of you. There's just no way to tell. It probably has a lot to do with the cop's mood, your level of combativeness, whether the cop is pro-gun, etc. The prosecutor's office is the same. What's their workload? Where does your case fall in the pecking order? How does the prosecutor feel about guns? Is he looking to make a name for himself? The prosecutor isn't going to go after you unless he thinks it's a case he can win. He wants a record of convictions. If you're a CCL holder and you're in a CLEARLY marked location, it's a slam-dunk for him. My guess if the location is one known by statute to be off-limits, you're more likely to be prosecuted. If the location is a school, my guess is you've got a 100% likelyhood of having a court date...ESPECIALLY in Cook County. So, if you're knowingly carrying in a GFZ, you're taking a chance. What's the likelihood you'll be spotted? What's the likelyhood someone will call 911? What's the likelihood that the cop will decide to arrest? What's the likelihood that the prosecutor will press charges? What's the likelihood that you'll be convicted? No one knows. this is utter nonsense, and probably coming from a non lawyer. i AM a lawyer and i DO defend people charged with CCL violations. IF you live in Chicago, you WILL get arrested, and the prosecutor WILL charge you AND try to convict you. the nonsense of slam dunk cases and wanting to win 100% and their record is pure BS! i speak from actual experience dealing with prosecutors every single day. i had the MOST polite client ever, charged and prosecuted. none of the niceties mattered, and they had no discretion nor any desire to drop the charges even if they could. Hoping for largess from the most powerful entity (the executive branch) is a fool's hope. we need the law changed. sadly, with illinois politics what they are, it probably WILL change, but not for the better when it comes to gun 'rights'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseeker Posted May 1, 2017 at 09:34 PM Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 09:34 PM this is utter nonsense, and probably coming from a non lawyer. i AM a lawyer and i DO defend people charged with CCL violations. IF you live in Chicago, you WILL get arrested, and the prosecutor WILL charge you AND try to convict you. the nonsense of slam dunk cases and wanting to win 100% and their record is pure BS! i speak from actual experience dealing with prosecutors every single day. i had the MOST polite client ever, charged and prosecuted. none of the niceties mattered, and they had no discretion nor any desire to drop the charges even if they could. Hoping for largess from the most powerful entity (the executive branch) is a fool's hope. we need the law changed. sadly, with illinois politics what they are, it probably WILL change, but not for the better when it comes to gun 'rights'.If you practiced downstate, I could pretty much guarantee that you would be a starving lawyer. Most of our LEO'S and SA's grew up with guns, right along side of most of the citizens...Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglebob Posted May 1, 2017 at 09:59 PM Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 09:59 PM this is utter nonsense, and probably coming from a non lawyer. i AM a lawyer and i DO defend people charged with CCL violations. IF you live in Chicago, you WILL get arrested, and the prosecutor WILL charge you AND try to convict you. the nonsense of slam dunk cases and wanting to win 100% and their record is pure BS! i speak from actual experience dealing with prosecutors every single day. i had the MOST polite client ever, charged and prosecuted. none of the niceties mattered, and they had no discretion nor any desire to drop the charges even if they could. Hoping for largess from the most powerful entity (the executive branch) is a fool's hope. we need the law changed. sadly, with illinois politics what they are, it probably WILL change, but not for the better when it comes to gun 'rights'.If you practiced downstate, I could pretty much guarantee that you would be a starving lawyer. Most of our LEO'S and SA's grew up with guns, right along side of most of the citizens... Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk I have a friend who took the class for his Illinois FCCL and he said that a LEO was teaching and said "don't worry about GFZ signs if a LEO is called there isn't a problem unless you refuse to leave. This was said by a Southern Illinois LEO. Your mileage may vary, of course. I take the state GFZ signs seriously,but it was good to hear should I miss seeing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted May 1, 2017 at 10:08 PM Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 10:08 PM Vactor did say "if you live in Chicago." And I'm sure he is correct. There is a different culture, I believe, stemming from the use of public funding. An SA down here would not be popular at all if he spent the county's money (~9995 residents) on "frivolous" pursuits like non criminal firearm violations. It is my understanding that in the larger municipalities it is viewed more like if you don't use maximum public funds then you're not doing it right. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangrel Posted May 1, 2017 at 10:10 PM Share Posted May 1, 2017 at 10:10 PM this is utter nonsense, and probably coming from a non lawyer. i AM a lawyer and i DO defend people charged with CCL violations. IF you live in Chicago, you WILL get arrested, and the prosecutor WILL charge you AND try to convict you. the nonsense of slam dunk cases and wanting to win 100% and their record is pure BS! i speak from actual experience dealing with prosecutors every single day. i had the MOST polite client ever, charged and prosecuted. none of the niceties mattered, and they had no discretion nor any desire to drop the charges even if they could. Hoping for largess from the most powerful entity (the executive branch) is a fool's hope. we need the law changed. sadly, with illinois politics what they are, it probably WILL change, but not for the better when it comes to gun 'rights'.If you practiced downstate, I could pretty much guarantee that you would be a starving lawyer. Most of our LEO'S and SA's grew up with guns, right along side of most of the citizens... Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk I have a friend who took the class for his Illinois FCCL and he said that a LEO was teaching and said "don't worry about GFZ signs if a LEO is called there isn't a problem unless you refuse to leave. This was said by a Southern Illinois LEO. Your mileage may vary, of course. I take the state GFZ signs seriously,but it was good to hear should I miss seeing one. Regardless of whether or not that may regionally be correct, and whether or not the instructor was an LEO and speaking from experience, the instructor was in violation of the FCCA for teaching this. We as instructors are approved by the state to teach our students what the law actually says. We have each signed an affidavit with the ISP that we will do exactly that. Teaching what the above instructor taught is akin to a drivers ed teacher teaching his students that if they roll through a stop sign and an officer sees it, to make sure you smile and speak politely and the officer will let you off with a warning. Does it happen? Sure. Is it guaranteed? Absolutely not! Is it what we should be teaching folks who have never carried a firearm before in a state that is relatively new to the CCW game? I think you already know the answer. Ignoring all else about what we should or should not be teaching, the instructor is violating the FCCA itself by failing to teach his students what the law actually says in favor of teaching them what he may or may not "know" from experience. If ISP discovered he was teaching this, his instructor credential would very likely get pulled, and he would face hefty fines, not to mention the current and former students who could very well apply for their licenses, only to find out that their instructor is no longer approved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseeker Posted May 2, 2017 at 04:19 AM Share Posted May 2, 2017 at 04:19 AM Regardless of whether or not that may regionally be correct, and whether or not the instructor was an LEO and speaking from experience, the instructor was in violation of the FCCA for teaching this. We as instructors are approved by the state to teach our students what the law actually says. We have each signed an affidavit with the ISP that we will do exactly that. Teaching what the above instructor taught is akin to a drivers ed teacher teaching his students that if they roll through a stop sign and an officer sees it, to make sure you smile and speak politely and the officer will let you off with a warning. Does it happen? Sure. Is it guaranteed? Absolutely not! Is it what we should be teaching folks who have never carried a firearm before in a state that is relatively new to the CCW game? I think you already know the answer. Ignoring all else about what we should or should not be teaching, the instructor is violating the FCCA itself by failing to teach his students what the law actually says in favor of teaching them what he may or may not "know" from experience. If ISP discovered he was teaching this, his instructor credential would very likely get pulled, and he would face hefty fines, not to mention the current and former students who could very well apply for their licenses, only to find out that their instructor is no longer approved. A drivers ed teacher once told me that if it ever comes between you and a dog...Take out the dog! Of course when we got back to school, we laughed it up and told our friends that he said it was ok to run over dogs. That was obviously not what he meant! Hearsay is just that... Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted May 2, 2017 at 04:47 AM Share Posted May 2, 2017 at 04:47 AM Regardless of whether or not that may regionally be correct, and whether or not the instructor was an LEO and speaking from experience, the instructor was in violation of the FCCA for teaching this. We as instructors are approved by the state to teach our students what the law actually says. We have each signed an affidavit with the ISP that we will do exactly that. Teaching what the above instructor taught is akin to a drivers ed teacher teaching his students that if they roll through a stop sign and an officer sees it, to make sure you smile and speak politely and the officer will let you off with a warning. Does it happen? Sure. Is it guaranteed? Absolutely not! Is it what we should be teaching folks who have never carried a firearm before in a state that is relatively new to the CCW game? I think you already know the answer. Ignoring all else about what we should or should not be teaching, the instructor is violating the FCCA itself by failing to teach his students what the law actually says in favor of teaching them what he may or may not "know" from experience. If ISP discovered he was teaching this, his instructor credential would very likely get pulled, and he would face hefty fines, not to mention the current and former students who could very well apply for their licenses, only to find out that their instructor is no longer approved. Can you provide the section and paragraph of the FCCA that applies? What would be the charge and prescribed punishment, fine, jail time or both? Are instructors subject to arrest for making errors during a course, or just to administrative action for repeated gross errors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.