Approved/Active but not Permit in hand

[WarCry]

I've been reading through these forums (lurking, some say) for quite a while, and lot more the last day or two, just seeing where the approval/issuance stuff is at. I'm a LONG way off from approval right now, but a helluva lot closer than I was yesterday (finally had the money and got my application submitted yesterday).

 

 

One thing I've noticed a lot of is people who's web-status is showing as Approved or Active but they've not gotten the permit by mail yet. I tried searching for the answer to this, but I can't seem to find it, so here goes:

 

 

What about carrying with the "Approved" or "Accepted" page printed and in your wallet, along with FOID, until the CCW permit itself arrives? It seems they're being fairly consistent with the permit number being FOID + the two extra digits, so it should be easily verifiable by LEO if contact happens.

 

Once the state has approved, given an expiration date, and set the status to Active, isn't the rest just paperwork? An analogy would be if you apply for - and are approved for - a personalized license plate. It takes 'em some time to stamp 'em out, but you get the "temp tag" or window sticker to show that you can legally drive the car. It doesn't have to stay in the driveway waiting for the tag, even though legally you have to have a plate on the car. It's a temporary measure during that waiting period.

 

Now, I'm writing this from a perspective of a "down-state" county (Adams). I don't think it's a stretch to say this might be something that's less of a risk for me than for someone up in Chicagoland, but I don't think it's a completely absurd notion.

 

Anyone else have any thoughts? "Concealed means concealed" and "active means active", right?

[TyGuy]

DON'T DO IT

 

It's been discussed at lenght somewhere here. Some say that you must have the permit with you (I fall into that camp out of not wanting to get arrested) and some say that ownership of the permit doesn't imply having to have it with you.

 

Unless you want to get arrested it's best not to do it. If you don't mind getting arrested then you should have been carrying already.

[BIGDEESUL]

Would you transport while leaving your foid at home and not in your person even though it's valid? Not a good idea.

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

 

 

[wtr100]

(430 ILCS 66/10)

Sec. 10. Issuance of licenses to carry a concealed

firearm.

 

(g) A licensee shall possess a license at all times the

licensee carries a concealed firearm except:

(1) when the licensee is carrying or possessing a

concealed firearm on his or her land or in his or her

abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on

the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an

invitee with that person's permission;

(2) when the person is authorized to carry a firearm

under Section 24-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012, except

subsection (a-5) of that Section; or

(3) when the handgun is broken down in a

non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or

is unloaded and enclosed in a case.

[TURAMBAR]

I woulnd't do it either. Legal CCW is so close why take a risk at this point? My app is still under review and I submitted on 01/07 with no prints. Waiting very very patiently..

[WarCry]

DON'T DO IT

 

It's been discussed at lenght somewhere here. Some say that you must have the permit with you (I fall into that camp out of not wanting to get arrested) and some say that ownership of the permit doesn't imply having to have it with you.

 

Unless you want to get arrested it's best not to do it. If you don't mind getting arrested then you should have been carrying already.

 

Well, like I said (or thought/meant to say), I figured the discussions had happened, but I couldn't find it. I guess I'm just curious with all the folks talking about seeing an expiration date. If the state considers the clock to be running, then I would think an argument should be able to be made for the permitee having the benefit of the doubt.

 

An example that came up in our CCW class is that you cannot legally operate a motor vehicle without your DL. If you get stopped without it, you will likely get the ticket. When you go to court on it, you take your license and show that, yes, you did have it and yes, it was valid at the time. 99/100 times the judge is going to toss that ticket and tell ya to keep it with you next time.

 

With the FCCL, it's not like the DMV where you can run out and get one the next day before class. You're not going to get the class, the application, and the delay completed before you go in front of a judge, right?

 

So in answer to the second question, no, I wouldn't KNOWINGLY transport without my FOID, but I wouldn't knowingly drive without my license, either. I have, however, done the latter more times than I care to admit (though my wife would be glad to remind me of every single one of them).

 

I know there are going to be some more-aggressive cops and/or states attorneys out there, but is CCW really that much different in this regard to a drivers license?

 

 

(625 ILCS 5/6-112)(from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 6-112)

Sec. 6-112. License and Permits to be carried and exhibited on demand. Every licensee or permittee shall have his drivers license or permit in his immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle and, for the purpose of indicating compliance with this requirement, shall display such license or permit if it is in his possession upon demand made, when in uniform or displaying a badge or other sign of authority, by a member of the State Police, a sheriff or other police officer or designated agent of the Secretary of State. However, no person charged with violating this Section shall be convicted if he produces in court satisfactory evidence that a drivers license was theretofor issued to him and was valid at the time of his arrest.

For the purposes of this Section, "display" means the manual surrender of his license certificate into the hands of the demanding officer for his inspection thereof.

(Source: P.A. 76-1749.)

 

See, the Motor Vehicle Code is worded pretty strongly, too, but those tickets don't often stick.

[Pipedoc]

The law failed to define possession or even describe what type of possession for that matter. There are different kinds of possession and not all of them include having the possessed item in hand. Look up constructive possession.

 

I think you would probably find yourself having to mount a defense in court if you were found without your license in hand but you may very well win the case. One thing is for sure, we will have a test case on this issue at some point in the near future.

[WarCry]

And for the record, I have no real intention of becoming a "test case" on this. Even if I wanted to, I'm still a long, LONG way off from even getting the "approved" or "active" status on the webpage. I applied yesterday, so I'm probably looking at closer to May for my permit.

 

 

I've just seen it posted several times that the state has started the "expiration" countdown for permits that take a while to show up.

[WarCry]

The law failed to define possession or even describe what type of possession for that matter. There are different kinds of possession and not all of them include having the possessed item in hand. Look up constructive possession.

 

I think you would probably find yourself having to mount a defense in court if you were found without your license in hand but you may very well win the case. One thing is for sure, we will have a test case on this issue at some point in the near future.

 

I have a friend that's an assistant state's attorney here. Maybe I'll bat it around with him as a strictly intellectual, non-binding exercise over drinks tonight.

[Dr. Rat]

You have to present your license to the authorities if they request it. If you don't it's a class B misdemeanor. Where's the wiggle room in that?

[ChadN.]

(430 ILCS 66/10)

Sec. 10. Issuance of licenses to carry a concealed

firearm.

 

(g) A licensee shall possess a license at all times the

licensee carries a concealed firearm except:

(1) when the licensee is carrying or possessing a

concealed firearm on his or her land or in his or her

abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on

the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an

invitee with that person's permission;

(2) when the person is authorized to carry a firearm

under Section 24-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012, except

subsection (a-5) of that Section; or

(3) when the handgun is broken down in a

non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or

is unloaded and enclosed in a case.

 

This. Everyone needs to retain some copy of the law with them. Whatever's said on the forum about the law, the fallback is always the copy at hand. The concept of conceal carry is new to this generation of Illinois; you do not want to be the test case.

[Pipedoc]

Personally I am not so worried about it. I am licensed and legal. Last week I ran out of the house in a hurry to drive my wife somewhere and forgot my wallet at home. I forget my wallet at home a couple of times a year. I don't think there are many people out there who have not done this at least a few times in there life. It is not the end of the world.

 

It is a very valid question and one that we need an answer to but I won't be sweating this one.

[wven33]

And for the record, I have no real intention of becoming a "test case" on this. Even if I wanted to, I'm still a long, LONG way off from even getting the "approved" or "active" status on the webpage. I applied yesterday, so I'm probably looking at closer to May for my permit.

 

 

I've just seen it posted several times that the state has started the "expiration" countdown for permits that take a while to show up.

May? Dont hold your breath

[Pipedoc]

The law failed to define possession or even describe what type of possession for that matter. There are different kinds of possession and not all of them include having the possessed item in hand. Look up constructive possession.

 

I think you would probably find yourself having to mount a defense in court if you were found without your license in hand but you may very well win the case. One thing is for sure, we will have a test case on this issue at some point in the near future.

 

I have a friend that's an assistant state's attorney here. Maybe I'll bat it around with him as a strictly intellectual, non-binding exercise over drinks tonight.

Please do and report back. I would be curious to hear the SA's opinion. I think at some point it will be like getting pulled over and not having your DL on you. Maybe you get a warning or maybe you have to show up in court but I don't think it will amount to much.

[Redlin]

The back of the card says "IL law requires you to carry your concealed carry license at all times when carrying a concealed firearm.." The wording of "possession"of a license is no longer arguable after reading that.You could still argue it I guess,but why bother,just wait.

[Pipedoc]

The writing on the back of the card is meaningless. It is not the law.

[wtr100]

The writing on the back of the card is meaningless. It is not the law.

 

The law says the same thing

 

 

(430 ILCS 66/10)

Sec. 10. Issuance of licenses to carry a concealed

firearm.

 

(g) A licensee shall possess a license at all times the

licensee carries a concealed firearm except:

(1) when the licensee is carrying or possessing a

concealed firearm on his or her land or in his or her

abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on

the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an

invitee with that person's permission;

(2) when the person is authorized to carry a firearm

under Section 24-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012, except

subsection (a-5) of that Section; or

(3) when the handgun is broken down in a

non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or

is unloaded and enclosed in a case.

[WarCry]

The back of the card says "IL law requires you to carry your concealed carry license at all times when carrying a concealed firearm.." The wording of "possession"of a license is no longer arguable after reading that.You could still argue it I guess,but why bother,just wait.

 

But that doesn't answer why you get a ticket for a drivers license tossed when you prove that you had it and it was active.

 

I know everyone is being hyper-careful about this stuff, but it seems to be borderline paranoia, like the people that get all hot and bothered over "printing" while carrying. Thankfully they put the "concealed or mostly concealed" wording into the FCCA.

[pjh]

Absolutely awful! Since Active with an Expire date of 2/27 I called and e-mailed ISP to make a claim of possible lost in mail claim as was suggested. About 45 minutes ago phone rang. Couldn't get to it in time so got phone message. It was from ISP responding to my inquiry. Tried to listen to message and got as far as my license has not been mailed yet. Then the message just cut off after the caller started the next sentence with "If..." Now can't get back through due to high volume.

[dodgeboy12008]

We are so particular with the words in laws and their exact meanings like the and/or as to the sbr law but not when it comes to this? The FCCL says must have possession of the license, not in immediate possession like the motor vehicle code does about the DL. If I drive my wifes car does that mean I do not have possession of my truck? I still own it but no I am not in immediate possition of it. Now I agree on not being the test case but how can we use the same argument both ways?

[moon]

I've been reading through these forums (lurking, some say) for quite a while, and lot more the last day or two, just seeing where the approval/issuance stuff is at. I'm a LONG way off from approval right now, but a helluva lot closer than I was yesterday (finally had the money and got my application submitted yesterday).

 

 

One thing I've noticed a lot of is people who's web-status is showing as Approved or Active but they've not gotten the permit by mail yet. I tried searching for the answer to this, but I can't seem to find it, so here goes:

 

 

What about carrying with the "Approved" or "Accepted" page printed and in your wallet, along with FOID, until the CCW permit itself arrives? It seems they're being fairly consistent with the permit number being FOID + the two extra digits, so it should be easily verifiable by LEO if contact happens.

 

Once the state has approved, given an expiration date, and set the status to Active, isn't the rest just paperwork? An analogy would be if you apply for - and are approved for - a personalized license plate. It takes 'em some time to stamp 'em out, but you get the "temp tag" or window sticker to show that you can legally drive the car. It doesn't have to stay in the driveway waiting for the tag, even though legally you have to have a plate on the car. It's a temporary measure during that waiting period.

 

Now, I'm writing this from a perspective of a "down-state" county (Adams). I don't think it's a stretch to say this might be something that's less of a risk for me than for someone up in Chicagoland, but I don't think it's a completely absurd notion.

 

Anyone else have any thoughts? "Concealed means concealed" and "active means active", right?

 

You'd break the law and be locked up. Don't do it. The law is clear you need the card to carry.

[Pipedoc]

The writing on the back of the card is meaningless. It is not the law.

 

The law says the same thing

 

 

(430 ILCS 66/10)

Sec. 10. Issuance of licenses to carry a concealed

firearm.

 

(g) A licensee shall possess a license at all times the

licensee carries a concealed firearm except:

(1) when the licensee is carrying or possessing a

concealed firearm on his or her land or in his or her

abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on

the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an

invitee with that person's permission;

(2) when the person is authorized to carry a firearm

under Section 24-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012, except

subsection (a-5) of that Section; or

(3) when the handgun is broken down in a

non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible, or

is unloaded and enclosed in a case.

No. The law and the back of the card do not read the same.

 

You are making an assumption that the intent of the law as written requires the license to be in your physical possession as opposed to constructive possession. Physical possession is a much safer bet but until this is ruled on it is all speculation. Credible arguments have been made for both interpretations.

[Dr. Rat]

The back of the card says "IL law requires you to carry your concealed carry license at all times when carrying a concealed firearm.." The wording of "possession"of a license is no longer arguable after reading that.You could still argue it I guess,but why bother,just wait.

 

But that doesn't answer why you get a ticket for a drivers license tossed when you prove that you had it and it was active.

 

I know everyone is being hyper-careful about this stuff, but it seems to be borderline paranoia, like the people that get all hot and bothered over "printing" while carrying. Thankfully they put the "concealed or mostly concealed" wording into the FCCA.

 

Because driving without your license is considered a fix-it ticket and carrying without your license is a misdemeanor.

 

I could see Illinois starting a reality series called "CCL Court". Just listening to the excuses and convoluted logic would be amusing.

 

"I thought I could carry with a screenshot of my application."

 

"I remembered my gun, but forgot my license."

 

"OK judge, but that's not the only definition of 'possess'?" (Or "concealed", "carry", "transport", "under the influence", "drug", etc.)

 

"Some guy on an internet forum said I couldn't be arrested if my BAC was under .08."

 

"I left my gun in the car with my wife so I left my license with her too so it would be legal."

 

Tune in.

[Glock23]

You are making an assumption that the intent of the law as written requires the license to be in your physical possession as opposed to constructive possession. Physical possession is a much safer bet but until this is ruled on it is all speculation. Credible arguments have been made for both interpretations.

The law also says that upon the request of the officer, the licensee:

shall disclose to the officer that he or she is in possession of a concealed firearm under this act, present the license upon request of the officer, and identify the location of the concealed firearm.

Pretty hard to do that if it's not in your physical possession.

[GcDm2010]

 

I have a friend that's an assistant state's attorney here. Maybe I'll bat it around with him as a strictly intellectual, non-binding exercise over drinks tonight.

 

As a fellow Adams county resident, I'm very curious to know the answer to this. However, states attorney John Bernard does not have a history of being friendly to the 2A. that's why I have not thought of trying this.

[fletcher969]

DON'T DO IT

 

It's been discussed at lenght somewhere here. Some say that you must have the permit with you (I fall into that camp out of not wanting to get arrested) and some say that ownership of the permit doesn't imply having to have it with you.

 

Unless you want to get arrested it's best not to do it. If you don't mind getting arrested then you should have been carrying already.

 

Well, like I said (or thought/meant to say), I figured the discussions had happened, but I couldn't find it. I guess I'm just curious with all the folks talking about seeing an expiration date. If the state considers the clock to be running, then I would think an argument should be able to be made for the permitee having the benefit of the doubt.

 

An example that came up in our CCW class is that you cannot legally operate a motor vehicle without your DL. If you get stopped without it, you will likely get the ticket. When you go to court on it, you take your license and show that, yes, you did have it and yes, it was valid at the time. 99/100 times the judge is going to toss that ticket and tell ya to keep it with you next time.

 

With the FCCL, it's not like the DMV where you can run out and get one the next day before class. You're not going to get the class, the application, and the delay completed before you go in front of a judge, right?

 

So in answer to the second question, no, I wouldn't KNOWINGLY transport without my FOID, but I wouldn't knowingly drive without my license, either. I have, however, done the latter more times than I care to admit (though my wife would be glad to remind me of every single one of them).

 

I know there are going to be some more-aggressive cops and/or states attorneys out there, but is CCW really that much different in this regard to a drivers license?

 

 

(625 ILCS 5/6-112)(from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 6-112)

Sec. 6-112. License and Permits to be carried and exhibited on demand. Every licensee or permittee shall have his drivers license or permit in his immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle and, for the purpose of indicating compliance with this requirement, shall display such license or permit if it is in his possession upon demand made, when in uniform or displaying a badge or other sign of authority, by a member of the State Police, a sheriff or other police officer or designated agent of the Secretary of State. However, no person charged with violating this Section shall be convicted if he produces in court satisfactory evidence that a drivers license was theretofor issued to him and was valid at the time of his arrest.

For the purposes of this Section, "display" means the manual surrender of his license certificate into the hands of the demanding officer for his inspection thereof.

(Source: P.A. 76-1749.)

 

See, the Motor Vehicle Code is worded pretty strongly, too, but those tickets don't often stick.

 

For those looking for a differentiation between the CCL and your DL with respect to possession, it's made clear above where DLs are concerned. No such wording exists for the CCL.

[WarCry]

May? Dont hold your breath

 

I submitted on day 4075 (Day 75 of 2014). I've seen a ton of folks posting with getting theirs in the 55-60 day range, and that's in the initial runs when you know they've been swamped and working bugs out. 4075 + 60 days = 4135, or May 15th.

 

As I said, that's about the earliest I'd expect.

[DiSc0rd]

The SA is my brother. His reply below. County and name withheld.

In your professional opinion, would you think a digital copy would work, if current. Or if they forgot a wallet and were stopped do you think the ticket it would stand?

 

"They have legislated a law whereby a digital copy of your proof of insurance is valid to show officer you have insurance. Therefore, could be acceptable, but some a-hole could argue that because legislature knew how to pass a law making digital copy acceptable as proof, but did not, their intent was to require physical possession of the license on your person. So buy a ****ing wallet and keep it with you until the law gets passed to allow digital proof. I would dismiss once I was shown proof."

Edited for bad words.

[pjh]

Expire date of 2/27/19 for me. Yet no license in hand yet. Called today and was told not even mailed yet and no commitment as to when it will be. Should I get my license on day 90, which seems highly doubtful, I will have lost a full 3 weeks of carry time that I paid for. Something intrinsically wrong here. But I have to follow the law. Do they?

[Marie]

I'm just shaking my head at this thread.