ealcala31 Posted April 9, 2018 at 04:47 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 04:47 PM I'm prob beating a dead/old horse. I have an IL CCL since 03/2014 and was told by my instructor and multiple instructors that if you have a CCL, handgun magazine capacity is preempted. I work part-time at a gun shop and a few people w/CCL's have said that after a traffic stop in Chicago, that they were taken to the police station and cited for violating Chicago's 15 round magazine restriction. They ended up receiving their firearm back w/ammo, but no magazine. Can municipalities restict magazine capacity for CCL holders, and will this citation and magazine confiscation hold up in court ??? I'm uploading a pic of CCL violations in my Chicago beat community that were noted but not explained what the violations were for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbrooks Posted April 9, 2018 at 04:54 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 04:54 PM I thought so as well but as we have all learned, Officers are different and not all of them know the CCL law like they should. Anyone else have any input? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted April 9, 2018 at 04:55 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 04:55 PM It's never been tested in court afaik. Most would say preemption trumps Chicago, Cook (10 rd) or other ordinances Was the mag capacity the only issue involved e.g. something else taken too or not charged. Only one I had heard charged prior, the guy had MJ and some other criminal activity besides a traffic citation iirc. Did the CPD in each case take posession of firearm at beginning of stop and then drop/check the mag? I wonder if one can FOIA CPD for more info on those violations... although this below gives me concern considering customer stories I have heard LOL ..."work part-time at a gun shop and a few people have said that"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealcala31 Posted April 9, 2018 at 05:43 PM Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 05:43 PM The customer told me his firearm was confiscated immediately and he was taken to the police. At the police station he was cited for a municipal ordinance for violating Chicago's 15 round magazine capacity. Before he left, he was given his firearm back w/the ammo, but Chicago kept the HC magazine. He stated the stop originated with speeding (IIRC) and he got a ticket for it. Another employer, asked a CPD who was waiting for range time, if that is Chicago policy. He said yes, depending on circumstance and how you carry yourself during the stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pies72618 Posted April 9, 2018 at 05:49 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 05:49 PM CPD probably seized the magazines under: 8-20-085(a) "High capacity magazines and certain tubular magazine extensions – Sale and possession prohibited – Exceptions" Per Chicago ordinance, “High capacity magazine” means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, including any such device joined or coupled with another in any manner, that has an overall capacity of more than 15 rounds of ammunition. A “high capacity magazine” does not include an attached tubular device to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition. You can search arrests under this ordinance here: https://home.chicagopolice.org/online-services/adult-arrests/ (Search for 8-20-0805). Just because there is a preemption doesn't mean you can't get arrested. It means you will get the privilege of spending money on an attorney to have the charges dropped later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted April 9, 2018 at 05:56 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 05:56 PM I'd hope that if this happened, it would have been reported here by a victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealcala31 Posted April 9, 2018 at 06:07 PM Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 06:07 PM That is one cool link pies 72618 but it doesn't give an arrest report, bummer, it just gives the violation of the arrest and location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:20 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:20 PM As an instructor myself, I agree that the pre-emption portion of the law also covers magazines and their capacities. Others may disagree and that's fine. If you had the opportunity as I did and watched the debate on the FCCA back in 2013, you would have heard Representative Brandon Phelps get it on record that as legislative intent that magazines are pre-empted by law. It would be expensive but this needs to be challenged in court so Chicago and Cook County understands that their ordinances are null and void. PERIOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealcala31 Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:34 PM Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:34 PM Is there a recorded record of it The King Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:38 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:38 PM Is there a recorded record of it The KingYes, there is. I have no idea on how to find it. I'm pretty sure someone will come along shortly with a link to the house debate for you. If you watch it, I will warn you that the stupid comments from certain reps will make you angry and nauseated at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:50 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 07:50 PM Discussion and transcript link. Never seen the video posted that I recall. http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=66540&page=1&do=findComment&comment=1104062 http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=66540&page=1&do=findComment&comment=1104177 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealcala31 Posted April 9, 2018 at 08:56 PM Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 08:56 PM Seems pretty clear to me, InterestedBystander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hap Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:07 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:07 PM Why these sorts of ordinances have not been challenged in court yet is just completely beyond me. What in the name of John Moses Browning are we waiting for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:31 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:31 PM Idk but I'd guess one of two things is happening. It may not be "worth" fighting an ordinance violation for the cost of the ticket and a magazine. Or, there are other unreported elements of the arrest that void the preemption and they deal away the other crime for the ordinance violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drusus Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:38 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:38 PM Since we don't have billionaire 2A friendly Soros/Bloomberg types on our side, IL desperately needs a 2A Legal Fund comprised of IL FOID holders. i.e. $100 a year from 1mil IL FOID holders ($10mil per yr), with regular meetings/votes from paying participants on 2A related issues like - mag capacity, public trans, preemption issues, GFZs, public parks, etc - to sue the state for any 2A infringements. Until there's means to go sue happy on the state, not much will change. We'd sue early and often. Wishful thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:47 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:47 PM if it happened, someone need s to fess up. no lawsuit without a plaintiff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishjames Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:50 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 09:50 PM Since we don't have billionaire 2A friendly Soros/Bloomberg types on our side, IL desperately needs a 2A Legal Fund comprised of IL FOID holders. i.e. $100 a year from 1mil IL FOID holders ($10mil per yr), with regular meetings/votes from paying participants on 2A related issues like - mag capacity, public trans, preemption issues, GFZs, public parks, etc - to sue the state for any 2A infringements. Until there's means to go sue happy on the state, not much will change. We'd sue early and often. Wishful thinking.That would be 100 million. $10 per year per FOID member sounds better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twostarrz Posted April 9, 2018 at 10:30 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 10:30 PM Is it something we could advertise in local gun stores? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drusus Posted April 9, 2018 at 11:41 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 11:41 PM if it happened, someone need s to fess up. no lawsuit without a plaintiffEventually and cases would surface, especially as anti's get brazen with confiscation and increased discrimination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drusus Posted April 9, 2018 at 11:57 PM Share Posted April 9, 2018 at 11:57 PM That would be 100 million. $10 per year per FOID member sounds better.Even better, I set the $ amount high and lowered the estimated FOIDs from 2mil (if I'm correct). I imagine it'd be hard to even ask for $10, based on the lack of enthusiasm and laying low in current climate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.