Ol'Coach Posted December 11, 2006 at 07:28 PM Share Posted December 11, 2006 at 07:28 PM I'm not sure if I have posted this on this site in the past, but if I have, it might be worth the reminder: About two years ago,I contacted the Attorney General’s Office, the local State’s Attorney’s office, and the District 10 Office of the Illinois State Police, asking this question to all three offices. “As an IL res, can I legally carry an unloaded handgun in a fanny pack or similar case in IL with a loaded magazine in the same compartment of the case, or on my person?” Office of the AG: You will have to call the State Police for an answer to that question!(Since when is the office of the AG not responsible for interpreting the law?) Local office of the SA: Neither the fanny pack nor the ammo can be immediately accessible.(Probably answered by a clerk to whom I didn’t make clear that I am an IL resident, have IL drivers license, and have a valid FOID card.) ISP: As long as the fanny pack, or case, is made to specifically carry a gun, yes. The case may even be hooked to the safety belt of a vehicle! However, as far as location of the ammo, you would be best served to have it not immediately accessible. Although the law does not regulate the location of the ammo, it would depend upon interpretation by the officer making the stop. I then asked if I was correct that what she was telling me was that by IL code I would be legal, but because interpretation of that code is up to the officer, if it were his choice to confiscate the firearm and arrest me, I would have to go to court to prove I was correct? Answer: yes! Three state offices, three different answers! Time and money. Worth it? Up to the individual! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ocellairs Posted December 11, 2006 at 08:30 PM Share Posted December 11, 2006 at 08:30 PM ...on that last one, I would have sent out a letter requesting information, and see if they would have responded in like fashion with the same answer. ...proof is in the pudding, and having that as evidence at ones trial. Would be a big stick to whack the DA over the head with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilphil Posted December 11, 2006 at 11:26 PM Share Posted December 11, 2006 at 11:26 PM ...on that last one, I would have sent out a letter requesting information, and see if they would have responded in like fashion with the same answer. ...proof is in the pudding, and having that as evidence at ones trial. Would be a big stick to whack the DA over the head with. If you want the expense and hassle of having to go to trial.It is absurd that we can be subject to arrest and prosecution for violating a law that even the police and State's Attorneys can't get together on a consistent interpretation of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Coach Posted December 12, 2006 at 04:32 PM Author Share Posted December 12, 2006 at 04:32 PM Oc...seems to me that a letter stating what I was told over the phone would say nothing more than, "...tol' ya so!" "...interpretation of the officer." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermk2 Posted December 12, 2006 at 05:37 PM Share Posted December 12, 2006 at 05:37 PM mm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockman Posted December 12, 2006 at 08:42 PM Share Posted December 12, 2006 at 08:42 PM When the Attorney General and your local states attorney refer to the state police for legal advice it is time to replace the attorneys with legal advisers who can read and understand the plain text. If the text is too complex for us average folks to comprehend then they should advocate simplification of the statutes. This would benefit all (except crooked politicians). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted December 13, 2006 at 06:47 AM Share Posted December 13, 2006 at 06:47 AM ISP: As long as the fanny pack, or case, is made to specifically carry a gun, yes. The case may even be hooked to the safety belt of a vehicle! However, as far as location of the ammo, you would be best served to have it not immediately accessible. Although the law does not regulate the location of the ammo, it would depend upon interpretation by the officer making the stop."as long as the case is specificly made for a gun"? The statute nor any case law that I know of requires anything other than the gun be in a "container" that completely encloses the gun. Yes, I know about the DNR regs, but that is a different matter and certainly does not rise to the level of a "felony" arrest. Don't forget John Horstman got $50,000 from DuPage county for their "interpretation" of the law. The next time someone cites the law, ask them to refer you to the statute or case law that defines those parameters. BY THE WAY "PANZERMK2", I like that Avatar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ocellairs Posted December 13, 2006 at 03:59 PM Share Posted December 13, 2006 at 03:59 PM Oc...seems to me that a letter stating what I was told over the phone would say nothing more than, "...tol' ya so!" "...interpretation of the officer." ...but, you cannot get away from the flip side of it. That point if left out, doesn't help the case. It is up to the jury to decide, not the officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Coach Posted December 13, 2006 at 04:33 PM Author Share Posted December 13, 2006 at 04:33 PM It is up to the jury to decide, not the officer.Yep! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymous too Posted December 13, 2006 at 06:16 PM Share Posted December 13, 2006 at 06:16 PM It would depend on the type of case, but for this one I'd rather have a bench trial(no jury) knowing my particular judges and their views. I'm not a big fan of juries especially with the "emotions" sometimes surrounding firearm issues. I probably wouldn't get a jury of "my" peers. From my perspective, I grew up around judges, state's attorneys, and lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermk2 Posted December 14, 2006 at 01:19 AM Share Posted December 14, 2006 at 01:19 AM mm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
templar223 Posted December 14, 2006 at 03:14 PM Share Posted December 14, 2006 at 03:14 PM ISP: As long as the fanny pack, or case, is made to specifically carry a gun, yes. The case may even be hooked to the safety belt of a vehicle! However, as far as location of the ammo, you would be best served to have it not immediately accessible. Although the law does not regulate the location of the ammo, it would depend upon interpretation by the officer making the stop."as long as the case is specificly made for a gun"? The statute nor any case law that I know of requires anything other than the gun be in a "container" that completely encloses the gun. Yes, I know about the DNR regs, but that is a different matter and certainly does not rise to the level of a "felony" arrest. Don't forget John Horstman got $50,000 from DuPage county for their "interpretation" of the law. The next time someone cites the law, ask them to refer you to the statute or case law that defines those parameters. BY THE WAY "PANZERMK2", I like that Avatar. The UUW statute does not require a case specifically made for a gun, HOWEVER, if you're doing anything that might be construed by an officer as bringing the IL Wildlife Code into play (driving on a rural road, hiking in a state park or any woods for that matter as two examples), then a 'creative' officer could apply the WC, which does mandate that firearms be transported in cases specifically designed to hold guns. There is no 'case law' that I'm aware of that mandates where ammo is stored because it's addressed in no way, shape or form in the IL UUW code. Translation, there are no restrictions - so long as the gun is unloaded and in this state, there doesn't have to be a bullet under the hammer for it to be considered loaded... merely a loaded mag in the mag well. It doesn't surprise me about the wide comments made when calling to check the law. In fact, if you were to call the same places and ask the same question, I'm betting you would receive different answers. The word we have gotten is that ISP officers are 'not supposed to talk about that' in reference to the legality of Fanny Pack Carry. Municipal cops are woefully undertrained on UUW. They often see gun and think "arrest" unless they have been specifically trained about the IL law. And a quick story about a local city, right in the heart of GSL territory. Chief sits down to a meeting with the command staff the day after a News Gazette story profiles me, with photo of me, my fanny pack and my gun, explaining IL law and it's provision on transporting guns. He tells them that he doesn't want any arrests, but if any of his officers encounter someone FPC, that he wants a report taken and the fanny pack seized for evidenciary reasons. He tells his command officers, "if we keep one or two of their guns for six months or so, I think they are going to think twice about putting on another fanny pack." His command officers, including the one that related the story to me, told him, "No. We're not getting sued for taking someone's gun who isn't violating the law." They settled on 'taking a report'. Two weeks later, I'm wearing mine while engaging in a police sponsored activity. I'm chatting with one of the officers and we walk into a group of about eight or so. We're about to break up when one of the sergeants says, "okay, boys. I want to know who's going to take the report on this" as he's pointing at my fanny pack. He had me for a second, then everyone merely turned on their heels and went back to what they were doing. The sergeant says, "just kidding" and smiled at me and puts his arm around me and told me not to worry. A half hour later, I almost nailed the chief in the face with the pack while navigating down the aisle of a packed bus. Thankfully, the further south in IL you go, GENERALLY SPEAKING, the better trained the cops are when it comes to the law on transporting guns. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mack69 Posted December 14, 2006 at 04:47 PM Share Posted December 14, 2006 at 04:47 PM Thankfully, the further south in IL you go, GENERALLY SPEAKING, the better trained the cops are when it comes to the law on transporting guns. I believe that may well be due to the fact that they have better things to do than to harass law abiding citizens.... Unlike some up here in cook county etc....where they figure harassing law abiding citizens is much safer than going after real criminals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckmorley Posted December 14, 2006 at 07:06 PM Share Posted December 14, 2006 at 07:06 PM Suppossedly, some LEOs have been told to "look out" for FPC'ers, but I've been doing it going on several years and have received nothing more than a few long looks from LEOs. ck morley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted December 14, 2006 at 07:44 PM Share Posted December 14, 2006 at 07:44 PM The UUW statute does not require a case specifically made for a gun, HOWEVER, if you're doing anything that might be construed by an officer as bringing the IL Wildlife Code into play (driving on a rural road, hiking in a state park or any woods for that matter as two examples), then a 'creative' officer could apply the WC, which does mandate that firearms be transported in cases specifically designed to hold guns. John The thing about the wildlife code and county roads etc. applies when the officer is determined to nail you for something. (That could be any officer, any time, any where in the state.) But it seems to me, that if you are not carrying a hunting permit they would also have to cite you for "hunting without a license" if they were to nail you for the gun not being in a "gun" case. Either that or the fact that you did not have a "hunting permit" would be evidence that you were not hunting. B(I This is all academic and makes for good conversation, but the bottom line is that the whole idea is sophomoric and we are like kids trying to get over on the teacher. Except in this case detention equals felony. Welcome to Illinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymous too Posted December 14, 2006 at 08:19 PM Share Posted December 14, 2006 at 08:19 PM There is no 'case law' that I'm aware of that mandates where ammo is stored because it's addressed in no way, There's no law in IL on location when transporting ammunition other than no ammunition can be in the firearm in any fashion. Loaded magazines are ok by themselves and not in the firearm, but I don't do it as a habit. The law differs from state to state. Federal law does specify firearms and ammunition be seperate and in the trunk when travelling from state to state. I don't have a trunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druid Posted December 15, 2006 at 02:48 AM Share Posted December 15, 2006 at 02:48 AM Fanny Packs B(I I still don't think I could wear one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymous too Posted December 15, 2006 at 04:38 AM Share Posted December 15, 2006 at 04:38 AM Fannypacktastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mack69 Posted December 15, 2006 at 04:05 PM Share Posted December 15, 2006 at 04:05 PM Now that was messed up....What the hey!!!o?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ocellairs Posted December 15, 2006 at 04:25 PM Share Posted December 15, 2006 at 04:25 PM Fanny Packs B(I I still don't think I could wear one. ...not after watching that. :thumb: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted December 16, 2006 at 12:34 AM Share Posted December 16, 2006 at 12:34 AM See, I've always disliked them. Now I dislike them even more, along with the person that posted that video link A half hour later, I almost nailed the chief in the face with the pack while navigating down the aisle of a packed bus. Assault with a deadly weapon! Woulda liked to see that police report, but glad no one was injurred B(I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglebob Posted December 16, 2006 at 04:15 AM Share Posted December 16, 2006 at 04:15 AM Templar, Glad to here that the farther south you go the better trained LEOs are on gun transport, I'm close to as far south as you can go. I never had a LEO mention anything about my pack except a friend who is a conservation officer who said black fanny packs are known for carrying guns. I commented that I may or may not be carrying a firearm. He didn't question me further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted December 18, 2006 at 12:33 AM Share Posted December 18, 2006 at 12:33 AM Templar, Glad to here that the farther south you go the better trained LEOs are on gun transport, I'm close to as far south as you can go. I never had a LEO mention anything about my pack except a friend who is a conservation officer who said black fanny packs are known for carrying guns. I commented that I may or may not be carrying a firearm. He didn't question me further. That is why I don't fanny pack well, not in Illinois anyway. Okay, let's see. Must be enclosed in a case made for a gun. Does this make everybody happy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l0SoV68BQU&NR Choose something like "War and Peace" and be thought an intellectual, heh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol'Coach Posted December 18, 2006 at 12:38 AM Author Share Posted December 18, 2006 at 12:38 AM That is why I don't fanny pack well, not in Illinois anyway. In states where you can legally carry with the proper permit, why would you want to fannypack, i.e., all our border states except WI and IO. What's your message, Gary? I don't understand what you're tryin' to say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted December 18, 2006 at 07:02 AM Share Posted December 18, 2006 at 07:02 AM I am trying to say that "concealed" is "concealed" and sometimes the fanny pack seems more appropriate than other methods of carry due to comfort, convenience, or other particular circumstances. Of course, the big difference is that the firearm will contain "fire" when in other states. Suppossedly, some LEOs have been told to "look out" for FPC'ers, but I've been doing it going on several years and have received nothing more than a few long looks from LEOs. ck morley I have a "fanny pack" that says "Million Mom March" on it. Do you think that could be considered "camouflage"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.