Jump to content


Photo

Concealed Carry and laser-equipped handguns - Cook county & Chicago


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#1 M3brad

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 29 August 2017 - 01:35 PM

I've exhausted all my resources and now I am turning to all of you.

Can we carry a laser-equipped handgun in Cook county and/or Chicago? Some reliable sources have said "yes" and others have said "there's no clear answer." Anybody out there with the answer?

#2 richp

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,116 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 04

Posted 29 August 2017 - 01:55 PM

Hi,

Don't expect a clear answer until there is a court case that goes through the full range of appeals, or the General Assembly makes it crystal clear.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips

#3 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,324 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 29 August 2017 - 02:17 PM

The legislature's intent was to preempt local ordinance in regard to the sights you use as a licensee (among other things). 

 

Sometimes the City dances to its own drummer but I think I've read in our forums that lasers haven't been a problem for the one or two people who posted about contact with law enforcement.


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#4 Raw Power

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 16

Posted 29 August 2017 - 02:20 PM

If it's a part of the gun (ships that way from the factory), I think you're definitely in the clear. If it's an aftermarket add-on, there may be a little less protection under the legislative intent of the FCCA, but we haven't seen a test case on that yet (as far as I know).


Edited by Raw Power, 29 August 2017 - 02:21 PM.


#5 M3brad

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:16 PM

A lieutenant for a suburban police department basically said the same thing. His words were, "Not a word about lasers and there's a lot of words!"

How about maximum magazine capacity while I have your attention?

Thanks for your lightening quick responses!!

#6 Glock23

    I am no one.

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,790 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 29 August 2017 - 04:42 PM

I think Chicago/Cook is 15 rounds per recent discussion? One might be 12... Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

** Illinois Carry - Supporting Member

** National Association for Gun Rights - Frontline Defender

** Illinois State Rifle Association - 3 year Member

** National Rifle Association - Patron Life Member

 


#7 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,304 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 29 August 2017 - 05:52 PM

Lasers are in the Chicago local ordinances but not aware of anyone convicted (or charged?) with the violation.

8-20-060 Possession of a laser sight accessory, firearm silencer or muffler.
(a) It is unlawful for any person to carry, possess, display for sale, sell or otherwise transfer any laser sight accessory, or a firearm silencer or muffler.
(b ) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any members of the armed forces of the United States, or the organized militia of this or any other state, or peace officers, to the extent that any such person is otherwise authorized to acquire or possess a laser sight accessory, or firearm silencer or muffler, and is acting within the scope of his duties.
(c ) Any laser sight accessory, or firearm silencer or muffler, carried, possessed, displayed or sold in violation of this section is hereby declared to be contraband and shall be seized by and forfeited to the city.
(Added Coun. J. 7-2-10, p. 96234, § 4)

8-20-070 Unlawful firearm, laser sight accessory, or firearm silencer or muffler in a motor vehicle Impoundment.
(a) The owner of record of any motor vehicle that contains an assault weapon, a laser sight accessory, or a firearm silencer or muffler, shall be liable to the city for an administrative penalty of $2,000 plus any towing and storage fees applicable under Section 9-92-080. If the violation takes place within 500 feet of the boundary line of a public park or elementary or secondary school, the penalty shall be $3,000 plus towing and storage fees. Any such vehicle shall be subject to seizure and impoundment pursuant to this section.
(b ) Whenever a police officer has probable cause to believe that a vehicle is subject to seizure and impoundment pursuant to this section, the police officer shall provide for the towing of the vehicle to a facility controlled by the city or its agents. Before or at the time the vehicle is towed, the police officer shall notify any person identifying himself as the owner of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation, of the fact of the seizure and of the vehicle owner's right to request a vehicle impoundment hearing to be conducted under Section 2-14-132 of this Code.
(c ) The provisions of Section 2-14-132 shall apply whenever a motor vehicle is seized and impounded pursuant to this section.
(Added Coun. J. 7-2-10, p. 96234, § 4; Amend Coun. J. 11-16-11, p. 14596, Art. I, § 1; Amend Coun. J. 7-17-13, p. 57262, § 1)

Edited by InterestedBystander, 29 August 2017 - 05:53 PM.

NRA Life Member
ISRA Member

#8 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,324 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 29 August 2017 - 05:53 PM

A lieutenant for a suburban police department basically said the same thing. His words were, "Not a word about lasers and there's a lot of words!"

How about maximum magazine capacity while I have your attention?

Thanks for your lightening quick responses!!

 

If you accept the fact that the legislature defines the meaning of the law it makes, and that "legislative intent" matters, then debate on SB114 of the 98th General Assembly provides some clarification.  This was the first trailer bill passed on the FCCA.

During House debate, in response to questioning by Representative Sullivan intended to define legislative intent, Representative Phelps responded:
 

Absolutely, Representative. Any unit or local government cannot regulate how you carry a concealed firearm, where you can carry it, what type of ammunition you can carry, how much you carry, the type of sights you use, the size of the magazine. The total and complete regulation of the carrying of a firearm is the sole exclusive jurisdiction of this Body. Regardless of what the aldermen in the City of Chicago think or want, we... we did not give decision makers on this issue, we are. The state only.
 


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#9 SKplumber

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts
  • Joined: 01-December 14

Posted 29 August 2017 - 07:58 PM

[quote name="mauserme" post="1104062" timestamp="1504050793"][quote name="M3brad" post="1104041" timestamp="1504044989"]
A lieutenant for a suburban police department basically said the same thing. His words were, "Not a word about lasers and there's a lot of words!"
How about maximum magazine capacity while I have your attention?
Thanks for your lightening quick responses!!
[/quote]
 
If you accept the fact that the legislature defines the meaning of the law it makes, and that "legislative intent" matters, then debate on SB114 of the 98th General Assembly provides some clarification.  This was the first trailer bill passed on the FCCA.
During House debate, in response to questioning by Representative Sullivan intended to define legislative intent, Representative Phelps responded:
 


Absolutely, Representative. Any unit or local government cannot regulate how you carry a concealed firearm, where you can carry it, what type of ammunition you can carry, how much you carry, the type of sights you use, the size of the magazine. The total and complete regulation of the carrying of a firearm is the sole exclusive jurisdiction of this Body. Regardless of what the aldermen in the City of Chicago think or want, we... we did not give decision makers on this issue, we are. The state only.
[/quote

There ya go everyone. End of discussion. If this doesn't answer the question once and for all then it will never be answered.Thank you very much mauserme!

#10 M3brad

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 30 August 2017 - 07:03 AM

I doubt that Rep Phelps would have my back on this one and I'd sure hate to be the first guy to test the law in Chicago. It's sure not worth having my gun taken, car impounded and heavy fines to carry a laser equipped firearm.

#11 Jeffrey

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,123 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 08

Posted 30 August 2017 - 08:23 AM

I doubt that Rep Phelps would have my back on this one and I'd sure hate to be the first guy to test the law in Chicago. It's sure not worth having my gun taken, car impounded and heavy fines to carry a laser equipped firearm.

I'd rather live and have a gun taken, car impounded, and pay fines.  A laser doesn't change the function of a gun.  For many it probably helps especially if you have only split second time to react.  IMO IANAL but I can't imagine a jury would make a decision based on a red light in the event that you had to use your gun in self defense.


...and justice for all

YOUR WALLET, the only place Democrats care to drill

#12 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,324 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 30 August 2017 - 08:39 AM

I doubt that Rep Phelps would have my back on this one and I'd sure hate to be the first guy to test the law in Chicago. It's sure not worth having my gun taken, car impounded and heavy fines to carry a laser equipped firearm.

 

From your opening post I thought you were looking for information.

 

I see now that your decision had already been made.


.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#13 M3brad

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 30 August 2017 - 10:20 AM

[/quote]From your opening post I thought you were looking for information.
 
I see now that your decision had already been made.[/quote]

mauserme, why the attitude? I think it was pretty clear I was looking for information and yes, from the information I gathered from this post, I have made my decision.

#14 BShawn

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,587 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 08

Posted 30 August 2017 - 10:24 AM

FWIW I live and carry in Chittycago every day, and my EDC has a laser!

 

Granted it's not a severe as before when we couldn't carry at all, my question is still the same: "Who are you more afraid of, criminals or cops?"


upload3.jpg

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ Licensed to carry since 2008

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ IL CCL 75 days from application to in hand!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ I'm not the "bad guy" here, I just want to be able to defend myself and my family. Anywhere I should be permitted to carry a pencil (1st amendment), I should also be able to carry a firearm (2nd amendment) !!!!!!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Why do I carry a handgun? Well, look at it this way -- I keep a fire extinguisher in my house. I don't expect to have a fire; indeed, it's highly unlikely. But in the unlikely event of fire, not having the means to stop the fire could result in serious property loss or personal injury to myself and my family. Neither do I expect to be a victim of violent crime; indeed, it's highly unlikely. But in the unlikely event of a violent crime, not having the means to stop the criminal could lead to serious property loss or personal injury to myself and my family. It is simply a matter of common-sense prudence."
GarandFan, 2007
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Drawing any line only restricts law abiding people from crossing such a line. The "line" doesn't exist for criminals so we have to support the second amendment.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good man with a gun"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


#15 Raw Power

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 16

Posted 30 August 2017 - 11:14 AM

 

A lieutenant for a suburban police department basically said the same thing. His words were, "Not a word about lasers and there's a lot of words!"

How about maximum magazine capacity while I have your attention?

Thanks for your lightening quick responses!!

 

If you accept the fact that the legislature defines the meaning of the law it makes, and that "legislative intent" matters, then debate on SB114 of the 98th General Assembly provides some clarification.  This was the first trailer bill passed on the FCCA.

During House debate, in response to questioning by Representative Sullivan intended to define legislative intent, Representative Phelps responded:
 

Absolutely, Representative. Any unit or local government cannot regulate how you carry a concealed firearm, where you can carry it, what type of ammunition you can carry, how much you carry, the type of sights you use, the size of the magazine. The total and complete regulation of the carrying of a firearm is the sole exclusive jurisdiction of this Body. Regardless of what the aldermen in the City of Chicago think or want, we... we did not give decision makers on this issue, we are. The state only.
 

 

 

 

I hadn't seen that before... Pretty clear-cut. I'd seen the legislative intent behind FOID transport on CTA, but not this. Thanks for posting it.



#16 richp

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,116 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 04

Posted 30 August 2017 - 11:59 AM

Hi,

The real problem lurks below the surface, in multiple stages.

A street cop and his/her sergeant who are not fully up to speed on this. Someone in the line of authority regarding charging decisions who thinks the court needs to have a say, supervised by a States Attorney who is virulently anti-gun. Add in the bad luck to get a Cook County judge who may be immune to following the actual law, as sometimes -- sadly -- is the case.

Detention. Bail. Hiring an attorney. Preliminary hearings. Trial. If convicted, appeal. If exonerated, lengthy frustrating attempts to get your gun and vehicle back. And who knows what I've missed? Well maybe time, money, stress, loss of freedom?

This is the likely reality that keeps anyone from being willing to be a test case. And it also motivates folks who have laser sights to be extra cautious, I'll bet.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips

Edited by richp, 30 August 2017 - 12:01 PM.


#17 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,304 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 30 August 2017 - 12:08 PM

just as fyi, transcript above and the question Rep Phelps was responding to starts on page 18 at: http://ilga.gov/Hous...98/09800080.pdf

Sullivan: "So, recently, the City of Chicago passed an ordinance
mandating that any restaurant ban the carrying of a concealed
firearm or face the loss of their liquor license. Now,
according to what we passed, is there anything in this Bill
that changes that preemption, the intent of our General
Assembly?"

Phelps: "Representative Sullivan, the city cannot, let me say
that again, the city cannot add additional places that a
person could not carry a concealed firearm, nor place any
additional mandate or requirements on licenses. They could
not ban carrying in a restaurant, they could not mandate that
all private property post signs, and what the City of Chicago
did was backdoor attempt of banning conceal carry. The law we
passed does not allow them to do that or any other Home Rule
ordinance."

Sullivan: "So to be clear, when the City of Chicago ordinance is
challenged in court, and when the court looks to the
legislative intent that we're talking about today, it is our
intent that the carry law be prohibited the sort of regulation
that the city is attempting to force upon businesses by
threatening their licenses they get from the city as a means
of forcing those to ban conceal carry."

Phelps: "Absolutely, Representative. Any unit or local government
cannot regulate how you carry a concealed firearm, where you...

Edited by InterestedBystander, 30 August 2017 - 04:55 PM.

NRA Life Member
ISRA Member

#18 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,583 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 30 August 2017 - 04:43 PM

If someone is going to use a laser one that is built into the gun including but not limited to a guide rod laser would be the most legally defensible since Chicago would need to regulate the entire handgun in direct violation of state law in order to regulate an integrated laser.


The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui

#19 spec5

    Nuclear Member

  • Members
  • 4,263 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 09

Posted 30 August 2017 - 06:26 PM




I doubt that Rep Phelps would have my back on this one and I'd sure hate to be the first guy to test the law in Chicago. It's sure not worth having my gun taken, car impounded and heavy fines to carry a laser equipped firearm.

 
From your opening post I thought you were looking for information.
 
I see now that your decision had already been made.

Some people don't want an answer to the question they asked. The OP doesn't know who Brandon Phelps is and the length he went to get us concealed carry in Illinois. Brandon Phelps had our backs for years and for years to come. You took the time Mauser to post the same thing you had posted numerous times before and didn't want to say to the OP that it has been covered over and over and over again. You took the time to answer in a very forthright way and respectful way. Thanks again for posting it again.




I doubt that Rep Phelps would have my back on this one and I'd sure hate to be the first guy to test the law in Chicago. It's sure not worth having my gun taken, car impounded and heavy fines to carry a laser equipped firearm.
 
From your opening post I thought you were looking for information.
 
I see now that your decision had already been made.
Some people don't want an answer to the question they asked. The OP doesn't know who Brandon Phelps is and the length he went to get us concealed carry in Illinois. Brandon Phelps had our backs for years and for years to come. You took the time Mauser to post the same thing you had posted numerous times before and didn't want to say to the OP that it has been covered over and over and over again. You took the time to answer in a very forthright way and respectfull way. I saw the same thing that you did from his reply that no matter what you said he had his mind made up. Thanks again for posting it again and helping us all.

Edited by spec5, 30 August 2017 - 06:35 PM.

NRA Member Life Member
ISRA Member
Illinois Carry
Pershing Nuclear Missile 56th Field Artillery Brigade Veteran
1/41 Field Artillary Germany

#20 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,861 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 31 August 2017 - 12:06 AM

I use a guide-rod laser sight in my EDC, and I will happily be the test case. I carry a laminated card with the relevant preemption statute on one side, and the legislative intent language on the other, to present along with my CCL and other documents to law enforcement if needed:

 

"Strictly preempts authority of local governments as to the regulation, licensing, possession, registration and transportation of handguns and handgun ammunition. Invalidates home rule communities' current restrictions such as Chicago's high capacity handgun magazine ban, handgun registration, and its prohibition on handgun laser sights and accessories."

 

It's right along side the cards of my current attorneys and when I can find a new Second Amendment attorney to have on retainer, I'll be nestling that right next to it as well.

 

Let them try to take my retired journalist and legal researcher, disabled veteran, domestic-violence-victim- and LGBTQIA-self-defense-instructing butt to court for a supposed violation. You better believe that I will be both their bad publicity and legal nightmare. I have lots of time these days, and my righteous curmudgeon quotient is astronomical.


Edited by ChicagoRonin70, 31 August 2017 - 12:06 AM.

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

Gb1XExdm.jpg
 
 

 
 
 
 


#21 TRJ

    Joyful Stoic

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 6,785 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 14

Posted 31 August 2017 - 04:26 AM

CPS Teacher Charged With Dealing Ammo, Gun Accessories In Federal Sting http://dnain.fo/2gpZJZe

Somebody got charged for providing a lazer sight to a felon...

Edited by TRJ, 31 August 2017 - 04:26 AM.


#22 Bubbacs

    #Fear The Clown

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,195 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 14

Posted 31 August 2017 - 05:43 AM

CPS Teacher Charged With Dealing Ammo, Gun Accessories In Federal Sting http://dnain.fo/2gpZJZe
Somebody got charged for providing a lazer sight to a felon...

Read the posted article
Confused as others
Selling or buying a "Extended" magazine is against the law?
Magazines aren't regulated are they?
Ammo.....yes
Handguns.....yes
But magazines and laser sights?
It said the FBI did the sting and it's the justice department that's charging him, no?
Illegally passing along a "Extended" magazine seems to be wrong, but I'm not up on Federal laws!

I think its just inaccurate reporting. The laser and mag are discussed in the 18 page charge document but only charges seem to be gun and ammo.
As posted in the original thread, peeps are stating there are no charges concerning the lazer sight you talk about!
I haven't taken the time to read the entire 18 pages posted on that same link you provided yet tho'.

Edited by Bubbacs, 31 August 2017 - 05:45 AM.


#23 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,861 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 31 August 2017 - 08:24 AM

Shoopdawhooplong.png

 

giphy.gif


“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

Gb1XExdm.jpg
 
 

 
 
 
 


#24 M3brad

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 31 August 2017 - 11:48 AM

ChicagoRonin70 - first of all, thank you for your service to our country and your passion for defending your rights!

I came here hoping I would get a definitive, black & white answer on the subject, but I see there isn't one at this point. To the two "mind readers" on this thread, I was truly hoping I'd get the green light to purchase a laser-equipped handgun for my new concealed carry weapon. So, my mind was not yet made up. To say this exact subject has been discussed numerous times is not accurate.

#25 Glock23

    I am no one.

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,790 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 13

Posted 31 August 2017 - 11:54 AM

It is accurate, actually, but no worries. ;) Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

** Illinois Carry - Supporting Member

** National Association for Gun Rights - Frontline Defender

** Illinois State Rifle Association - 3 year Member

** National Rifle Association - Patron Life Member

 


#26 RoadyRunner

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,735 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 12

Posted 01 September 2017 - 06:33 AM

My main carry gun has a built in laser. Ergo, it's not an 'accessory'. And I often carry it in Chicago..

IC Supporting member
NRA life member
NRA certified Basic Pistol Instructor

Illinois Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

 


#27 Plinkermostly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 591 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 13

Posted 02 September 2017 - 08:23 AM

I hate going in to 'the city.'  I didn't used to -- grew up going there to see movies and museums.  My Bro. was in town staying in a Loop hotel so we took the train in to see him.  I decided not to carry -- which is one of the major reasons I hate going downtown.  I figured I could FOID carry on the train -- and then I have to carrry a camera case alll day.  And when we went to lunch every dang store and resturant (Monroe, Wabash, State area) got the stupid sign in the window.  Then there is the Laser issue 'cause my LCP came with one.

 

I know I could have -- but what a pain. They won.

 

So I just carried my OTF and a switchblade.



#28 M3brad

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 22 September 2017 - 12:45 PM

I thought I'd update you all on what I found out from a high-ranking Chicago police official. I did search the subject and if this has been discussed before, I apologize. Apparently, this is relatively new news . . .

- aggravated assault: The act of pointing a laser equipped firearm in the vicinity, but not at or on another individual
- aggravated battery: The act of pointing a laser equipped firearm at or on an another individual.

Law enforcement, according to my source, considers the laser an extension of yourself and that's where the "assault" and "battery" come in. He also said that an OEM or aftermarket laser is allowed in Chicago, but also stated if you're going to use the laser, it better be justified, therefore you better be firing the weapon. His words, not mine.

#29 Jeffrey

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,123 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 08

Posted 22 September 2017 - 01:08 PM

I thought I'd update you all on what I found out from a high-ranking Chicago police official. I did search the subject and if this has been discussed before, I apologize. Apparently, this is relatively new news . . .

- aggravated assault: The act of pointing a laser equipped firearm in the vicinity, but not at or on another individual
- aggravated battery: The act of pointing a laser equipped firearm at or on an another individual.

Law enforcement, according to my source, considers the laser an extension of yourself and that's where the "assault" and "battery" come in. He also said that an OEM or aftermarket laser is allowed in Chicago, but also stated if you're going to use the laser, it better be justified, therefore you better be firing the weapon. His words, not mine.

Assuming that you were asking the original question as if in the event of using the gun in self defense.  The assault/battery charges are of no concern if you were in a self defense situation.  If you do have a laser and it is pointed at someone, it should be just a split second later before the first round is released.  Again this is a self defense situation.  I'd be extremely cautious taking any advice from a "high ranking" Chicago cop.  Not badmouthing the PoPo but we have seen many times that they aren't as up to date on specific laws as some here.  In their eyes it is the attitude of arrest now and let the court figure it out.


...and justice for all

YOUR WALLET, the only place Democrats care to drill

#30 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,304 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 22 September 2017 - 01:16 PM

He also said that an OEM or aftermarket laser is allowed in Chicago, but also stated if you're going to use the laser, it better be justified, therefore you better be firing the weapon. His words, not mine.

He says it is allowed, but, while perhaps not having been used to charge anyone, the laws are still on the books...see post #7. Is there an updated CPD memorandum/directive?

http://directives.ch...3488664866.html

Edited by InterestedBystander, 22 September 2017 - 01:22 PM.

NRA Life Member
ISRA Member




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users