Unanimous Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:10 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:10 PM A pistol is a pistol. The caliber has nothing to do with it. Many calibers are chambered in both rifle and pistol. If it meets the definition of pistol/handgun you may carry it under the FCCA.I find this entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helpdesk9 Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:10 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:10 PM Re the AR pistol guy. If it was loaded and unencased and he got it dropped he is lucky. And stupid. That is a definite violation. Not a definite violation. It was a concealed pistol, the guy had a CCL. Discussion here: http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=50892&page=1 "My understanding of the ccw law is there is a very clear point made that you cannot conceal carry something that is not a handgun." "an AR pistol" Is it a pistol or not!?According to the ATF, it is a handgun. According to the ISP, it is a handgun.Therefore, qualifying with an AR PISTOL, or walking around with one in a backpack is legal under FCCL.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedoc Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:25 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:25 PM A pistol is a pistol. The caliber has nothing to do with it. Many calibers are chambered in both rifle and pistol. If it meets the definition of pistol/handgun you may carry it under the FCCA.I find this entertaining. How so? Do you think the caliber is the determining factor? Do you think one is only authorized to carry certain handguns in the FCCA? Please explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:40 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 04:40 PM A pistol is a pistol. The caliber has nothing to do with it. Many calibers are chambered in both rifle and pistol. If it meets the definition of pistol/handgun you may carry it under the FCCA. I find this entertaining.How many days did you wait for it? 1=rifle3=handgun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mostholycerebus Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:28 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:28 PM My understanding of the ccw law is there is a very clear point made that you cannot conceal carry something that is not a handgun. This meaning a rifle caliber weapon that is modified to "technically" be a "pistol" is a tremendous NO-NO. Him having it in the vehicle wasn't the problem, the fact that it was either unencased and/or loaded was my understanding as to why it was the issue. He was somewhat vague on this, saying it was out of reach and out of sight under a board. By having it in that status in his vehicle it becomes subject to carry instead of transporting and carrying an AR pistol concealed is a big no-no We better all turn in our glocks then: link How many days did you wait for it?1=rifle3=handgun There is also an 'other' category which is a 3 day wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unanimous Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:35 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:35 PM We better all turn in our glocks then: linkdumbest post ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unanimous Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:47 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:47 PM A pistol is a pistol. The caliber has nothing to do with it. Many calibers are chambered in both rifle and pistol. If it meets the definition of pistol/handgun you may carry it under the FCCA.I find this entertaining. How so? Do you think the caliber is the determining factor? Do you think one is only authorized to carry certain handguns in the FCCA? Please explain. no not the caliber at all, there's plenty of 5.7 pistols that can be legally conceal carried. The problem is that it's a modified longgun - modified to "pistol" status bu subtracting a stock and any sort of vertical fore-grip and it still has a very long OAL. The AR-15 rifle and it's military predecessor the M16 were not designed on a pistol and thereafter modified into a rifle, the pistol versions of the ar-15 were retroactively designed on the Ar15 rifle chassis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedoc Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:55 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:55 PM Sorry. Illinois and the BATFE disagree with you. All that matters is that the lower receiver was built as a pistol and not a rifle. Even you recognize that there are pistol versions. If it is a pistol it is legal to carry under the FCCA. Period. Don't think so? Cite the law please. There is a difference between ignorance and willful ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unanimous Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:59 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 05:59 PM I'm not disagreeing with the ATF in the slightest. What I am saying is that my instructor told me the IL CCW law has a very specific provision that you cannot carry something such as an AR15 "pistol" because of it's OAL in so much as that particular law does not recognize it as a "handgun" eligible for concealed carry - even if it has the prosthetic limb attachment or whatever they use on those things. My instructor laid it out plain as day and it was very convincing at the time. If he was mistaken I would be surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedoc Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:02 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:02 PM Prepare to be surprised. Maybe you could call your instructor and ask him to cite this law he is talking about. Dollars to doughnuts he won't be able to find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:03 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:03 PM no not the caliber at all, there's plenty of 5.7 pistols that can be legally conceal carried. The problem is that it's a modified longgun - modified to "pistol" status bu subtracting a stock and any sort of vertical fore-grip and it still has a very long OAL. The AR-15 rifle and it's military predecessor the M16 were not designed on a pistol and thereafter modified into a rifle, the pistol versions of the ar-15 were retroactively designed on the Ar15 rifle chassis You're confusing several unrelated concepts. To our knowledge no one ever alleged he had converted an AR from rifle to pistol form. Had he been charged with doing so, those charges would not fall under the FCCA at all. We better all turn in our glocks then: linkdumbest post ever. I suspect mostholycerebus was trying to link to these AR Pistols which are sold quite legally throughout the state. There is a lot to learn here, if you would take the time to listen. Whether you do or not, further personal attacks will be removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmer Fudd Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:14 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:14 PM I'm not disagreeing with the ATF in the slightest. What I am saying is that my instructor told me the IL CCW law has a very specific provision that you cannot carry something such as an AR15 "pistol" because of it's OAL in so much as that particular law does not recognize it as a "handgun" eligible for concealed carry - even if it has the prosthetic limb attachment or whatever they use on those things. My instructor laid it out plain as day and it was very convincing at the time. If he was mistaken I would be surprised.He was WRONG...is that clear enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWBH Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:35 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 06:35 PM We better all turn in our glocks then: linkdumbest post ever. Ok - as far as I can tell there are four categories that people on this forum fit in. Know A Lot - SomeKnow Some - SomeKnow a Little - SomeKnow It All - None Remarks like that accomplish nothing to further the cause of CC and are counter productive in building a brotherhood to fight those who want to deny us our Constitutional Right under the 2A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted October 6, 2014 at 07:15 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 07:15 PM I'm not disagreeing with the ATF in the slightest. What I am saying is that my instructor told me the IL CCW law has a very specific provision that you cannot carry something such as an AR15 "pistol" because of it's OAL in so much as that particular law does not recognize it as a "handgun" eligible for concealed carry - even if it has the prosthetic limb attachment or whatever they use on those things. My instructor laid it out plain as day and it was very convincing at the time. If he was mistaken I would be surprised. Don't rely on something someone else told you about the law to be a fact, even an instructor. Read and learn it for yourself. I have a copy on my phone, my tablet, my desktop, and a copy in a dropbox account I can get to from anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domin8 Posted October 6, 2014 at 07:36 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 07:36 PM Police officer is also the only profession in law that doesn't require an education beyond high school. Yes, I know that sounds disrespectful to police officers. The intent isn't to be disrespectful, but to be informational. I know many officers that have college degrees. What you should ask is, what was your instructors qualification to interpret the law? Interpretation is not a police officers job. Enforcement is. Only judges interpret the law. Attorneys argue based on their clients position. Every time I hear a police officer is instructing concealed carry I get a bit nervous for the student, and the quality of education and information they are receiving. I'm not saying all police officers teaching concealed carry are not credible sources. I just happen to hear stories all over the country. Do yourself a favor and research the law for yourself. Ignorance is never an excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neumann Posted October 6, 2014 at 08:28 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 08:28 PM According to Illinois law, a handgun is a firearm designed to be fired with one hand, not from the shoulder. (You can use two hands as long as there is only one vertical grip.). Illinois does not specify a maximum (or minimum) length, capacity, or that the magazine must be cocentric with the grip. Chicago and Cook County made some distinctions along that line, now preempted by State law. Nor are there any stipulations as to whether the ammunition is designed for a rifle or handgun. There are several handguns which take ammunition up to .308 Winchester (or larger), and .22 Long Rifle ammunition is used in both rifles and handguns, as are many other nominally "pistol" cartridges. If it left the factory as a handgun, it is a handgun according to the ATF and Illinois. If it left the factory as a rifle (long arm) and was altered thereafter, it is subject to NFA registration and licensing and illegal in Illinois. There are even lever action handguns, reminiscent of the "mule's leg" carried by Steve McQueen in "The Bounty Hunter" TV series. Any questions as to what constitutes "concealed?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unanimous Posted October 6, 2014 at 08:29 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 08:29 PM Police officer is also the only profession in law that doesn't require an education beyond high school. Yes, I know that sounds disrespectful to police officers. The intent isn't to be disrespectful, but to be informational. I know many officers that have college degrees. What you should ask is, what was your instructors qualification to interpret the law? Interpretation is not a police officers job. Enforcement is. Only judges interpret the law. Attorneys argue based on their clients position. Every time I hear a police officer is instructing concealed carry I get a bit nervous for the student, and the quality of education and information they are receiving. I'm not saying all police officers teaching concealed carry are not credible sources. I just happen to hear stories all over the country. Do yourself a favor and research the law for yourself. Ignorance is never an excuse.I agree with you, but if I am in error I am certainly on the side of caution rather than disregard. Because of what an AR pistol is someone (even if allowed to) carrying it may end up being the subject of (at best) a false arrest, or at worse the business end of a LEO's bullet in the heat of a messy situation. Agree with it or not, legal it may be but in this country we still have nutjobs pulling off mass shootings with rifles such as this and even many cops wont be assuming that it's a good guy would be carrying one concealed, right or wrong - legal or not. Especially in a heated situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw45 Posted October 6, 2014 at 09:01 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 09:01 PM Does anyone have more info on the landlord case from march?I have tried googling for more info and have been waiting to find out more about this case. I suspected it could have been bad reporting, even discussed two scenerios- Landlord pulls gun on tenant and demands rent, then hides gun orLandlord is attacked/threatened while trying to collect rent, pulls gun and escapes situation, knowing that Law enforcement is arriving disarms and secures firearm in vacant unit that he controls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw45 Posted October 6, 2014 at 09:16 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 09:16 PM Unanimous, Would you please contact your instructor and inform them that they are mistaken, and or ask them to cite relevant laws? Do you think it is right to pay someone so much money to learn about the law and to be misinformed? What else have you been misinformed about? The pistol issue is a very simple one, there are many other issues in regards to concealed carry and use of lethal force that are more complicated, did you receive proper instruction on these matters? The great thing about being an american is that you can make your own choices, just as long as they are legal.So if you want to err on the side of caution, that is great.But you paid a lot of money, it would be nice if you were making informed decisions. There are many issues that I teach what is legal and then discuss the issues surrounding them such as an AR pistol or FOID carrying/transporting a firearm and loaded magazine.Issues such as ignorance on the latest laws by law enforcement, of which I have seen. Or issues such as a bad 911 call, such as what happened in that Ohio walmart (particularly issues with disarming while carrying on a motorcycle). Please help correct such ignorance from our instructors, I for one would like to know that I was teaching incorrect information so that I could correct it. Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flw Posted October 6, 2014 at 10:56 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 10:56 PM Unanimous, Would you please contact your instructor and inform them that they are mistaken, and or ask them to cite relevant laws? Do you think it is right to pay someone so much money to learn about the law and to be misinformed? What else have you been misinformed about? The pistol issue is a very simple one, there are many other issues in regards to concealed carry and use of lethal force that are more complicated, did you receive proper instruction on these matters? The great thing about being an american is that you can make your own choices, just as long as they are legal.So if you want to err on the side of caution, that is great.But you paid a lot of money, it would be nice if you were making informed decisions. There are many issues that I teach what is legal and then discuss the issues surrounding them such as an AR pistol or FOID carrying/transporting a firearm and loaded magazine.Issues such as ignorance on the latest laws by law enforcement, of which I have seen. Or issues such as a bad 911 call, such as what happened in that Ohio walmart (particularly issues with disarming while carrying on a motorcycle). Please help correct such ignorance from our instructors, I for one would like to know that I was teaching incorrect information so that I could correct it. Matt This is clearly a +1 post Matt. I wonder how many people go around believing what one person said and never validating a important point or points I'm sure that what people believe are GFZ's vs what the law says they are, have people believing all sorts of half truths and myths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw45 Posted October 6, 2014 at 11:27 PM Share Posted October 6, 2014 at 11:27 PM Thanks FLW,I am an instructor and I try to get everything right, and I will tell people when I am not sure, I'm not too proud to say I don't know.I start off the second day of class (when we cover the law) by informing students that I try to do my best, but to check things out for themselves and I try to give them the information to do so.As I joke in class 'Well Matt said so' is not a legal defense.And I have been wrong before, I actually share mistakes I have made in the past so that they can learn from them and hopefully not make the same mistakes.Some people like to learn from their mistakes, I think it is less painful to learn from the mistakes of others so I share mine. Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRJ Posted October 7, 2014 at 01:38 PM Share Posted October 7, 2014 at 01:38 PM Does anyone have more info on the landlord case from march?I have tried googling for more info and have been waiting to find out more about this case. I suspected it could have been bad reporting, even discussed two scenerios- Landlord pulls gun on tenant and demands rent, then hides gun orLandlord is attacked/threatened while trying to collect rent, pulls gun and escapes situation, knowing that Law enforcement is arriving disarms and secures firearm in vacant unit that he controls.Landlord called in to NPR radio show about this. Claims media is unwilling to publish the rest of the story or print correction. Landlord only drew gun after tenant pulled a knife. Landlord exonerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw45 Posted October 7, 2014 at 04:53 PM Share Posted October 7, 2014 at 04:53 PM Thanks,I wish we could find the landlord and get the story.Many of my students have heard this story and how it was written in the paper, I caution them to with hold judgement.Sometimes what you hear in the news isn't quite accurate. Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljnowel Posted October 8, 2014 at 05:37 AM Share Posted October 8, 2014 at 05:37 AM I'm not disagreeing with the ATF in the slightest. What I am saying is that my instructor told me the IL CCW law has a very specific provision that you cannot carry something such as an AR15 "pistol" because of it's OAL in so much as that particular law does not recognize it as a "handgun" eligible for concealed carry - even if it has the prosthetic limb attachment or whatever they use on those things. My instructor laid it out plain as day and it was very convincing at the time. If he was mistaken I would be surprised. You should ask for a refund for your training then. An AR pistol is not a rifle made into a pistol. When the lower starts it's life as a pistol it has always been one, period. I hope you are man enough to admit it when you finally realize how wrong you are. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted October 8, 2014 at 12:13 PM Share Posted October 8, 2014 at 12:13 PM We all know that the critics predicted a "wild west" or "blood in the streets" from those legally carrying a firearm,wait.. you mean this didn't happen? Re the AR pistol guy. If it was loaded and unencased and he got it dropped he is lucky. And stupid. That is a definite violation. yes it was loaded. yes the case got dropped. no violation of the act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavyDuty Posted October 8, 2014 at 01:11 PM Share Posted October 8, 2014 at 01:11 PM I'm not disagreeing with the ATF in the slightest. What I am saying is that my instructor told me the IL CCW law has a very specific provision that you cannot carry something such as an AR15 "pistol" because of it's OAL in so much as that particular law does not recognize it as a "handgun" eligible for concealed carry - even if it has the prosthetic limb attachment or whatever they use on those things. My instructor laid it out plain as day and it was very convincing at the time. If he was mistaken I would be surprised. I suspect he was confused - I believe Cook County or Chicago had something in their ordnance like this. Edit - derp spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryware Posted October 8, 2014 at 01:25 PM Share Posted October 8, 2014 at 01:25 PM Wasn't there also an incident in which a CCL holder was arrested for impersonating a police officer? If I recall, the guy was trying to get into some establishment by flashing his CCL Badge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRJ Posted October 8, 2014 at 02:20 PM Share Posted October 8, 2014 at 02:20 PM Wasn't there also an incident in which a CCL holder was arrested for impersonating a police officer? If I recall, the guy was trying to get into some establishment by flashing his CCL Badge.This wasn't a ccl arrest. It was impersonation of law enforcement that got him in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unanimous Posted October 8, 2014 at 03:25 PM Share Posted October 8, 2014 at 03:25 PM I'm not disagreeing with the ATF in the slightest. What I am saying is that my instructor told me the IL CCW law has a very specific provision that you cannot carry something such as an AR15 "pistol" because of it's OAL in so much as that particular law does not recognize it as a "handgun" eligible for concealed carry - even if it has the prosthetic limb attachment or whatever they use on those things. My instructor laid it out plain as day and it was very convincing at the time. If he was mistaken I would be surprised.You should ask for a refund for your training then. An AR pistol is not a rifle made into a pistol. When the lower starts it's life as a pistol it has always been one, period. I hope you are man enough to admit it when you finally realize how wrong you are. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk haven't been able to ask him yet but heck yeah I'll be more than happy to admit I was wrong. I think an AR pistol is a great idea for a vehicle gun and would carry one myself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted October 9, 2014 at 03:09 AM Share Posted October 9, 2014 at 03:09 AM A pistol is a pistol. The caliber has nothing to do with it. Many calibers are chambered in both rifle and pistol. If it meets the definition of pistol/handgun you may carry it under the FCCA. Exactly!Think of .22LR & Mag., 9mm, .38 Special/.357 Mag, .44 Special/Mag, and .45 Long Colt. All of these calibers are available in both pistols and rifles. Are there any more besides those unusual AR pistols? I'm also excluding the "Judge" firearms as they are more "shotgun" than rifle/pistol types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.