146 replies to this topic

[Tvandermyde]

Coach I don't get the question?

[Ol'Coach]

Tvandermyde, on Oct 16 2009, 06:31 PM, said:

Coach I don't get the question?

Quote

It has been my position that since non-residents are expemt from FOID to use, or possess a firearm, they can have an unloaded, cased firearm. The FOID card requirement only applies to Illinois residents.

Sorry.

For FOID card holders, location of the case, or ammo, doesn't matter, or at least, that's my understanding.  Firearm/ammo (not loaded) could be in the console, enclosed in a case on my lap, etc....What about non-res?  Does the location of the "enclosed in a case" matter?  Can a non-res have the firearm in a console?  Can it be "enclosed in a case" on their lap, or in the passenger seat, or must it be, "not immediately accessible"?

[junglebob]

Ol'Coach, on Oct 17 2009, 12:28 AM, said:

Tvandermyde, on Oct 16 2009, 06:31 PM, said:

Coach I don't get the question?

Quote

It has been my position that since non-residents are expemt from FOID to use, or possess a firearm, they can have an unloaded, cased firearm. The FOID card requirement only applies to Illinois residents.

Sorry.

For FOID card holders, location of the case, or ammo, doesn't matter, or at least, that's my understanding.  Firearm/ammo (not loaded) could be in the console, enclosed in a case on my lap, etc....What about non-res?  Does the location of the "enclosed in a case" matter?  Can a non-res have the firearm in a console?  Can it be "enclosed in a case" on their lap, or in the passenger seat, or must it be, "not immediately accessible"?

On the ISP website their wording about transport for non-residents is-  "It is recommended that in order to be in compliance with all statutes, non-residents transport firearms  1. Unloaded, and 2. Enclosed in a case, and 3. Not immediately accessible or broken down in a non-functioning state."

If it is absolutely necessary for non-residents to transport this way why is the word "recommended" in there.  They also recommend that women not defend themselves from attack with a firearm but use a comb, nail file, keys etc.  none of those objects are mandated by state law for self defense.   So possibly the non-resident would be legal having a firearm unloaded and encased, and the not immediately accessible or broken down is just their "recommendation".   In the Chicago area some ordinances might make transport requirements different.  These wouldn't be called "statutes" I don't think.

Is the ISP just asking for non-residents to transport the way they'd like them to rather than the way they have to?

[Tvandermyde]

I belive that non-residents can transport in the SAME way residents can, they justy don't have FOID cards as they are expempt.

[Ocellairs]

Tvandermyde, on Oct 16 2009, 03:14 PM, said:

lockman --

it has been my position that since non-residents are expemt from FOID to use, or possess a firearm, they can have an unloaded, cased firearm. The FOID card requirement only applies to Illinois residents.

...the way I read the current provision of the law....they basically have to go by our transportations law....but the case must not be easy accessible.

[FST_Kent]

[quote]On the ISP website their wording about transport for non-residents is- "It is recommended that in order to be in compliance with all statutes, non-residents transport firearms 1. Unloaded, and 2. Enclosed in a case, and 3. Not immediately accessible or broken down in a non-functioning state."

If it is absolutely necessary for non-residents to transport this way why is the word "recommended" in there. They also recommend that women not defend themselves from attack with a firearm but use a comb, nail file, keys etc. none of those objects are mandated by state law for self defense. So possibly the non-resident would be legal having a firearm unloaded and encased, and the not immediately accessible or broken down is just their "recommendation". In the Chicago area some ordinances might make transport requirements different. These wouldn't be called "statutes" I don't think.

Is the ISP just asking for non-residents to transport the way they'd like them to rather than the way they have to?[/quote]

The and above should be an or.

The ISP's website says this:

How can I legally transport a firearm on my person or in my vehicle?

There is more than one way to legally transport a firearm. However, in order to be in compliance with all statutes, it is recommended all firearms be transported:

Unloaded,
Enclosed in a case and,
By persons who have a valid FOID card.

What constitutes a legal "case" for transporting a firearm?

The Criminal Code refers to "a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container." However, the Wildlife Code is more specific, defining case as "a container specifically designed for the purpose of housing a gun or bow and arrow device which completely encloses such gun or bow and arrow device by being zipped, snapped, buckled, tied, or otherwise fastened with no portion of the gun or bow and arrow device exposed."  


The reason the ISP reccommends cased and unloaded is because of the conflict with the wildlife code.

The 3 legal ways to transport a firearm in IL per the criminal code:

[quote](i) are broken down in a non‑functioning state;  

or

(ii) are not immediately accessible;

or

(iii) are unloaded and enclosed in a case,  firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card[/quote]

Per the ISP's brochure dated 3/09:
[url="http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/1-154.pdf"]http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/1-154.pdf[/url]

[quote]HOW CAN I LEGALLY TRANSPORT A FIREARM
ON MY PERSON OR IN MY SPORTS UTILITY VEHICLE (SUV), PICKUUP TRUCK, VAN, STATION
WAGON, OR EVEN A MOTORCYCLE?

Three statutory codes regulate the possession, transfer,
and transportation of firearms - the Criminal Code, the
Wildlife Code, and the Firearm Owner’s Identification Act.
In order to comply with those statutes when transporting
a firearm, it must be:

1. unloaded, and
2. enclosed in a case, and
3. by persons who have a valid FOID card.
4. non-residents must be eligible to possess
or acquire firearms and ammunition in their
state of residence.[/quote]

But this is strange to me for a non-resident.  It would make sense to me if they were passing through IL per federal law.

[quote]IF A NON-RESIDENT IS COMING TO ILLINOIS
TO HUNT AND WOULD LIKE TO BRING
THEIR FIREARM, HOW DO THEY LEGALLY TRANSPORT IT?

Non-residents must be legally eligible to possess
or acquire firearms and ammunition in their state of
residence. It is recommended that in order to be in
compliance with all statutes, non-residents transport
all firearms:

1. Unloaded, and
2. Enclosed in a case, and
3. Not immediately accessible or broken down in a
nonfunctioning state.[/quote]


Ask Coach.  He went to an ISP district office and was told they are only taught unloaded and cased is legal in the academy.

[Sigma]

Ok Im clear on transporting in my vehicle or even in a attache case. But what about inside of a Grocery store or in a Walgreens. Would that be considered transporting since you are at a destination and not in transit.

[maynard]

Why is it that consevation says that you have to transport your fire arm in a case specifically designed to carry a firearm. I was ticketed for it and the states attorney tossed out the ticket. I had it in a fully enclosed zippered container,the front pocket of a backpack in the back of my explorer, but was still written a ticket. conservation code and Il law should be the same, one would think anyway.

[defaultdotxbe]

maynard, on 02 May 2011 - 10:13 PM, said:

Why is it that consevation says that you have to transport your fire arm in a case specifically designed to carry a firearm. I was ticketed for it and the states attorney tossed out the ticket. I had it in a fully enclosed zippered container,the front pocket of a backpack in the back of my explorer, but was still written a ticket. conservation code and Il law should be the same, one would think anyway.

youd think, but it isnt

IL wildlife code specifies that a case must be one designed specifically for a firearm, while the criminal code simply says it must enclose the firearm

there have been numerous attempts to synchronize the 2 laws, but people cant seem to decide which one should overwrite the other

[maynard]

defaultdotxbe, on 02 May 2011 - 10:49 PM, said:

maynard, on 02 May 2011 - 10:13 PM, said:

Why is it that consevation says that you have to transport your fire arm in a case specifically designed to carry a firearm. I was ticketed for it and the states attorney tossed out the ticket. I had it in a fully enclosed zippered container,the front pocket of a backpack in the back of my explorer, but was still written a ticket. conservation code and Il law should be the same, one would think anyway.

youd think, but it isnt

IL wildlife code specifies that a case must be one designed specifically for a firearm, while the criminal code simply says it must enclose the firearm

there have been numerous attempts to synchronize the 2 laws, but people cant seem to decide which one should overwrite the other

The states atty also told me it was legal to carry in a fanny pack with clip on your side but warned me I would be ok in my county but couldn't promise how officers would deal with it.

[defaultdotxbe]

maynard, on 02 May 2011 - 10:58 PM, said:

The states atty also told me it was legal to carry in a fanny pack with clip on your side but warned me I would be ok in my county but couldn't promise how officers would deal with it.

if its a pack like this: http://www.copsplus....prodnum2125.php it should be ok under both criminal and wildlife codes. and a loaded magazine is fine too, as long as its not inserted into the gun

AFAIK there are no counties where this type of carry is explicitly banned (may be a few towns though) but as the states atty warned, a LEO on the street may have different ideas, and i can definitely see how an ambition SA might try to prosecute a case like this


insert obligatory reminder that i am not a lawyer here <---

[Uncle Harley]

here is what my city code says

9.76.010 - Deemed guilty when.

Any person who carries a concealed revolver, pistol or other weapon on or about his person, or a razor as a weapon, or who, in a threatening or boisterous manner, displays or flourishes any deadly weapon, is guilty of carrying concealed weapons.

would that make fany pack cary illegial   and if  so would it just be a city ordinance violation  or a uuw?

[maynard]

I'm lucky enough to have a SA that believes in our rights to protect our families.

[maynard]

Is the center console of my truck an approved container now?

[Uncle Harley]

maynard, on 03 May 2011 - 12:03 AM, said:

Is the center console of my truck an approved container now?

according to the diggens case  the rear console of a car was,  i dont see why one in a truck would be any different but im no lawyer

[Howard Roark]

maynard, on 03 May 2011 - 12:03 AM, said:

Is the center console of my truck an approved container now?

Yes. And also the rear-console, or rear outer or center arm rest.

We've had some big wins in the Illinois courts.  Pretty much, you can have an unloaded gun in a case with ammo separate from the gun but close to it.   In a car/truck or on your person.  Enclosed, unloaded in a case.  I know some of the anti's don't like it very much but that is the law.  The anti's support is going down the drain on these gun issues.  

The people who fanny pack carry in Illinois are doing good work on this issue.

[Uncle Harley]

im holding off on FPC in my hometown untill i can get a better interpertation of the city code

[defaultdotxbe]

Uncle Harley, on 02 May 2011 - 11:57 PM, said:

here is what my city code says

9.76.010 - Deemed guilty when.

Any person who carries a concealed revolver, pistol or other weapon on or about his person, or a razor as a weapon, or who, in a threatening or boisterous manner, displays or flourishes any deadly weapon, is guilty of carrying concealed weapons.

would that make fany pack cary illegial   and if  so would it just be a city ordinance violation  or a uuw?

i wonder how far "about his person" extends. it would seem to be if this is read to outlaw fanny pack carry, it would outlaw most other forms of transport as well, such as just a normal case being carried in your hand

[IL Firearms Academy]

Good information, great brochure!  

[Uncle Harley]

defaultdotxbe, on 03 May 2011 - 12:28 AM, said:

Uncle Harley, on 02 May 2011 - 11:57 PM, said:

here is what my city code says

9.76.010 - Deemed guilty when.

Any person who carries a concealed revolver, pistol or other weapon on or about his person, or a razor as a weapon, or who, in a threatening or boisterous manner, displays or flourishes any deadly weapon, is guilty of carrying concealed weapons.

would that make fany pack cary illegial   and if  so would it just be a city ordinance violation  or a uuw?

i wonder how far "about his person" extends. it would seem to be if this is read to outlaw fanny pack carry, it would outlaw most other forms of transport as well, such as just a normal case being carried in your hand

that is what I was thinking,  they way this reads  I could be in violation driving through town with my shotgun in a case  on the way to my deer stand

[PPK]

Uncle Harley, on 03 May 2011 - 07:43 AM, said:

defaultdotxbe, on 03 May 2011 - 12:28 AM, said:

Uncle Harley, on 02 May 2011 - 11:57 PM, said:

here is what my city code says

9.76.010 - Deemed guilty when.

Any person who carries a concealed revolver, pistol or other weapon on or about his person, or a razor as a weapon, or who, in a threatening or boisterous manner, displays or flourishes any deadly weapon, is guilty of carrying concealed weapons.

would that make fany pack cary illegial   and if  so would it just be a city ordinance violation  or a uuw?

i wonder how far "about his person" extends. it would seem to be if this is read to outlaw fanny pack carry, it would outlaw most other forms of transport as well, such as just a normal case being carried in your hand

that is what I was thinking,  they way this reads  I could be in violation driving through town with my shotgun in a case  on the way to my deer stand

I think that's highly unlikely. Have you ever heard of anyone arrested for that?

[Uncle Harley]

[quote name='PPK' date='03 May 2011 - 10:18 AM' timestamp='1304439512' post='266674']
[quote name='Uncle Harley' date='03 May 2011 - 08:43 AM' timestamp='1304430190' post='266615']
[quote name='defaultdotxbe' date='03 May 2011 - 12:28 AM' timestamp='1304404136' post='266558']
[quote name='Uncle Harley' date='03 May 2011 - 12:57 AM' timestamp='1304402268' post='266549']
here is what my city code says

9.76.010 - Deemed guilty when.

Any person who carries a concealed revolver, pistol or other weapon on or about his person, or a razor as a weapon, or who, in a threatening or boisterous manner, displays or flourishes any deadly weapon, is guilty of carrying concealed weapons.

would that make fany pack cary illegial   and if  so would it just be a city ordinance violation  or a uuw?
[/quote]
i wonder how far "about his person" extends. it would seem to be if this is read to outlaw fanny pack carry, it would outlaw most other forms of transport as well, such as just a normal case being carried in your hand
[/quote]


that is what I was thinking,  they way this reads  I could be in violation driving through town with my shotgun in a case  on the way to my deer stand
[/quote]

I think that's highly unlikely. Have you ever heard of anyone arrested for that?
[/quote]



I agree, it is Highhly unlikely and I serousisly doubt that anyone ever has or ever will be aressted for something like that.  HOWEVER that is not the point    it is on the books that way and it only takes  one  dink to write you up just because he doesn't like you.    The real reason I am concerned is  I cannont fanny pack cary with this ordinance on the books. However if there were language that states this do not pertain to the lawfull transportation of a unloaded encased firearm by a person with a valid FOID.  It would be clear on wether you can transport and how to do so.   Hopefully  it will be a mute point in a few months, but still.

[mack69]

Quote

I agree, it is highly unlikely and I serousisly doubt that anyone ever has or ever will be aressted for something like that.  HOWEVER that is not the point    it is on the books that way and it only takes  one  dink to write you up just because he doesn't like you.    The real reason I am concerned is  I cannont fanny pack cary with this ordinance on the books. However if there were language that states this does not pertain to the lawfull transportation of a unloaded encased firearm by a person with a valid FOID.  It would be clear on wether you can transport and how to do so.

People have been arrested for this very thing in the past. It is all very murky territory and all LEO's do not necessarily understand the law. Even with the Supreme court ruling that a vehicles console IS a case, lwa enforcement police still may not be familiar enough with the new ruling. To be safe I always keep a copy of the ISP Transport you firearm legally brochure (http://www.isp.state.../docs/1-154.pdf) and a copy of the People vs. Diggins case (console carry)in all my vehicles and in my range bag to politely show the LEO in case I get stopped.

Disclaimer:  Illinois Carry neither promotes nor discourages fanny pack carry.  That decision is left up to the individual.

[pyre400]

mack69, on 03 May 2011 - 12:53 PM, said:

Quote

I agree, it is highly unlikely and I serousisly doubt that anyone ever has or ever will be aressted for something like that. HOWEVER that is not the point it is on the books that way and it only takes one dink to write you up just because he doesn't like you. The real reason I am concerned is I cannont fanny pack cary with this ordinance on the books. However if there were language that states this does not pertain to the lawfull transportation of a unloaded encased firearm by a person with a valid FOID. It would be clear on wether you can transport and how to do so.

People have been arrested for this very thing in the past. It is all very murky territory and all LEO's do not necessarily understand the law. Even with the Supreme court ruling that a vehicles console IS a case, lwa enforcement police still may not be familiar enough with the new ruling. To be safe I always keep a copy of the ISP Transport you firearm legally brochure (http://www.isp.state.../docs/1-154.pdf) and a copy of the People vs. Diggins case (console carry)in all my vehicles and in my range bag to politely show the LEO in case I get stopped.

Disclaimer: Illinois Carry neither promotes nor discourages fanny pack carry. That decision is left up to the individual.

May want the holmes decision too... That's the first case of applied diggins precedent.

I'm still hoping RTC makes fanny pack irrelevant...

[Hooch]

Can anyone answer this?
If Im at a restaurant and have my firearm in my fanny pack unloaded,and my wife has the loaded mag in her purse, am I legal?

[Blackviper]

joe bear, on 03 May 2011 - 03:11 PM, said:

Can anyone answer this?
If Im at a restaurant and have my firearm in my fanny pack unloaded,and my wife has the loaded mag in her purse, am I legal?

I would have to say yes,  as Criminology Minor and Criminal Justice student studying criminal law I do not see a problem with it at all.  For the most part  I would not ave a problem with if the mag was in the fanny pack with you.  If I were law enforcement officer  I would not have a problem with this as most won't, we would want it to be the first you tell us  though just for our safety.

I live  near a University were beating and robberies are high in the campus area I know of students that do carry like this in the back packs. I came say I blame them when the police have done little to curve the problem. We just went through a shooting here in town  this past Sunday that was drug and gang related  and luckily police were on the scene already as it was going down.  No injuries occurred to innocent by standers but this would have been a good case for conceal carry here in IL.

[Hooch]

Ok thanks for the info

[lilguy]

And here is what 3 SA's say about fanny pack's. I'd be real careful. No lawyer here is going to defend you for free and if you loose your FOID privileged that's it game over. Internet bravado aside, this is not settled law.

"Anyone caught carrying a handgun in their fanny pack will be arrested and prosecuted, state's attorneys from Illinois' three largest counties warned Wednesday.

A Web site run by Concealed Carry Inc. has been urging people to carry their guns in their fanny packs because they believe appellate court cases in Illinois clear the way for that.

They are mistaken, Cook County State's Attorney Dick Devine said. He was joined by DuPage County State's Attorney Joe Birkett and Lake County State's Attorney Mike Waller.

"Anyone who wants to transport a firearm in a fanny pack in an attempt to bring vigilante justice to the streets of our city is sadly mistaken," Devine …

[Sigma]

How old is that
Did you say Dick Divine? He still got a job?
Did you mention concealed carry inc? They still open?

[junglebob]

Must be at least a couple years old Anita Alverez is the Cook County States Attorney and at www.thetruthaboutguns.com there is an interview with her and it apparently was before the McDonald decision.  She talks about her support for gun control and thinks no one should have a gun.  She is in favor of an AWB. She favors a law that no could own a gun. I would expect if she doesn't feel inclined to follow the law she will take a fanny pack transport case to court.  At the time of the interview she was chief deputy to Dick Divine.