120 replies to this topic

[Don Gwinn]

My CGRE piece is up, I'm off to educate young minds.  Don't break anything while I'm gone.  

I'll do more tonight when I get a chance to read the decision, but I'm running late as it is and Examiner's publisher program is royally screwed up.

[RXtion]

Gbbear, on Oct 8 2009, 10:53 AM, said:

BudMan5, on Oct 8 2009, 10:22 AM, said:

Ol'Coach, on Oct 8 2009, 10:18 AM, said:

By that ruling, then, no longer a question about fanny packs, correct?

I would be real cautious about that. "Transporting" in a vehicle and "transporting" on a person are two entirely different things.

On the face of it, I would agree but I'll bet you a dollar to a donut that as soon as someone gets caught doing that it will end up in court.

There will be screams from the antis very soon, bvery fast and very vocal.

Fights on.

So if I have wear a fanny pack with an unloaded gun inside my vehicle, what does that do?

I am no lawyer, but, I'd say that it is still being transported on your person until you take the fanny pack off in the car.

[Ocellairs]

Ol'Coach, on Oct 8 2009, 10:57 AM, said:

JMO, but if you read the entire document, it reads as though the Court is strongly recommending suggesting that the IL legislature amend the wording to, "firearms case," or words to that effect.

That's the way I read it too.  

I disagree with the court.... the guy has to go back to court and settle the matter if the center console was ajar (shut/locked) thusly being "enclosed" definded by the law.

I think we all know that LEO's never every lie and the jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  

[Ol'Coach]

If I interpret the Court's decision correctly, the center console doesn't have to be locked, just closed, so that the gun is "enclosed in a case".  (Wasn't the state's argument that, at some point, the "case" was open"?)  

That being "the case," seems to me that having the firearm there and a mag in your shirt pocket would be much quicker than having to open a fanny pack.

As Abolt stated...LTC and forget about all the other "stuff"!

[GarandFan]

What the h ... ?

I have been scouring the Tribune for this state Supreme Court ruling and find noting on it.

I found ramblings by some Alberding person ... but nothing about this court ruling.

He he ...

Chicago and Denial.  They go together.

[THE KING]

Ol'Coach, on Oct 8 2009, 11:35 AM, said:

If I interpret the Court's decision correctly, the center console doesn't have to be locked, just closed, so that the gun is "enclosed in a case".  (Wasn't the state's argument that, at some point, the "case" was open"?)  

That being "the case," seems to me that having the firearm there and a mag in your shirt pocket would be much quicker than having to open a fanny pack.

After reading the courts opinion, they are calling the Cameron's court analysis incorrect. So, does this mean that not just the center console but the glove compartment is now also considered a "case" by law. Or does this ruling just affect the center console ? The Cameron portion is on page 6 of the written opinion in the Diggins case.


Budman, you said transporting in a vehicle and transporting on a person is two entirely different things. That I have to disagree with you on.  Transporting your firearm has certain criteria as set forty by the ILCS. As we all know, it's unloaded, enclosed in a case and you have to be in posession of a FOID card. That criteria is for transporting in a vehicle or on your person. My question is what's entirely different ?

[Molly B.]

The Illinois State Police brochure on how to legally transport a firearm on my person or in my vehicle -

Molly B.

p.s. Doesn't mean you won't get charged if carrying on your person.

[Tvandermyde]

"given the word case its plain and ordinary meaning, as we must, permits but one conclusion: the term "case" in section 24-1.6 includes any portable or nonportable reseptical and need not be intrepreted only in referance to firearms."

note the term ANY.

Guys this is big. As I said before the state was rebuffed in every arguement they made.

with incorporation, it becomes even bigger.

[Ocellairs]

Ol'Coach, on Oct 8 2009, 11:35 AM, said:

If I interpret the Court's decision correctly, the center console doesn't have to be locked, just closed, so that the gun is "enclosed in a case".  (Wasn't the state's argument that, at some point, the "case" was open"?)  

That being "the case," seems to me that having the firearm there and a mag in your shirt pocket would be much quicker than having to open a fanny pack.

As Abolt stated...LTC and forget about all the other "stuff"!

As I read it....there is some doubt as to the center console at the time as being "shut". The law says "enclosed", and if the console is a jar.....not shut completely then law was broken.

[abolt243]

Ocellairs, on Oct 8 2009, 12:31 PM, said:

Ol'Coach, on Oct 8 2009, 11:35 AM, said:

If I interpret the Court's decision correctly, the center console doesn't have to be locked, just closed, so that the gun is "enclosed in a case". (Wasn't the state's argument that, at some point, the "case" was open"?)

That being "the case," seems to me that having the firearm there and a mag in your shirt pocket would be much quicker than having to open a fanny pack.

As Abolt stated...LTC and forget about all the other "stuff"!

As I read it....there is some doubt as to the center console at the time as being "shut". The law says "enclosed", and if the console is a jar.....not shut completely then law was broken.

I just went to my truck and looked, my console is "shut" as we speak.  Everything in it is completely enclosed.

Tim

[GarandFan]

Here it is, in the Tribune.  And HA!  It doesn't say anything about the guns needing to be unloaded (of course we know they do, but the average Tribune reader doesn't)


http://www.chicagotr...0,6859495.story

Ill. court OKs storing guns in car consoles

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - The Illinois Supreme Court says gun owners can carry weapons in the ordinary storage boxes built into their cars.

The question was whether a compartment for items like CDs and sunglasses also meets the legal definition of a "case" for carrying guns. Illinois law lets people carry guns in their cars so long as they are stored in a case or other container.

The court ruled Thursday that a car's storage box is good enough.

The ruling was prompted by a Peoria case in which a man had been sentenced to 2{ years in prison for carrying two pistols in his car's storage compartment.

[GarandFan]

As an aside, this case was "People v Diggins."

Just which "people", exactly?  Sure as hell wasn't me!



I am thrilled to see Illinois lose this case on every argument they had.  Too bad they can soak the tax-payers (the People) to defend their indefensible, anti-2A position.

[Ocellairs]

abolt243, on Oct 8 2009, 12:55 PM, said:

Ocellairs, on Oct 8 2009, 12:31 PM, said:

Ol'Coach, on Oct 8 2009, 11:35 AM, said:

If I interpret the Court's decision correctly, the center console doesn't have to be locked, just closed, so that the gun is "enclosed in a case". (Wasn't the state's argument that, at some point, the "case" was open"?)

That being "the case," seems to me that having the firearm there and a mag in your shirt pocket would be much quicker than having to open a fanny pack.

As Abolt stated...LTC and forget about all the other "stuff"!

As I read it....there is some doubt as to the center console at the time as being "shut". The law says "enclosed", and if the console is a jar.....not shut completely then law was broken.

I just went to my truck and looked, my console is "shut" as we speak.  Everything in it is completely enclosed.

Tim

Whew thats a relief.  Thought for sure that if the console hadn't been completely shut, that damn rat you have for a pet would get loose.

[1957Human]

My apologies to those who asked me for more info after my post this a.m. Sorry to say, but our Internet service is only sporatic today and I haven't been able to get back on to this site long enough to post anything until just now.

Fortunately, Todd was there to carry the ball over the line.

[lockman]

The ruling gave Diggins a second chance but the police contend the console was open and not closed, which may lead to a new trial.

[Federal Farmer]

lockman, on Oct 8 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

The ruling gave Diggins a second chance but the police contend the console was open and not closed, which may lead to a new trial.

Yes, he is not out of the woods yet, by any stretch, but unloaded carry in any case is now backed up by IL Supreme Court precedent.  For his sake, I hope he gets a sympathetic jury next time around.

[asfried1]

Federal Farmer, on Oct 8 2009, 01:47 PM, said:

lockman, on Oct 8 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

The ruling gave Diggins a second chance but the police contend the console was open and not closed, which may lead to a new trial.

Yes, he is not out of the woods yet, by any stretch, but unloaded carry in any case is now backed up by IL Supreme Court precedent.  For his sake, I hope he gets a sympathetic jury next time around.

This is an argument for video recording any encounter with the police. Heck, they do it to us.

[Eireman]

Great news!

As for the remand to hear the case over due to the condition of the console lid:


"IF I FAIL TO ZIP UP THE CASE ENTIRELY, WILL I BE GUILTY OF A FELONY?
No, as long as the firearm is unloaded, and none of the aggravating factors of the Unlawful Use of Weapons law are present. However, to fully comply with the law, firearm cases must be completely zipped or otherwise completely fastened shut."

Aside from the he said / they said aspect of whether the console was opened and/or when it was opened.  The State Police tri-fold informs citizens that a case may be partially open and not be a felony as long as the other factors don't apply.  I know it refers to a zipper case but partially open containment is partially open containment.  The report stated he had a FOID and the weapons were unloaded.   But not being familiar with all the details of the original case it is difficult to know what other aggravating factors may have existed... hopefully improper use of turn signal is not one of them!

Lesson learned - never use your weapon as a paper weight for your wallet in the console.

[lockman]

WARNING!!

If you do transport in the center console make sure it is the only thing in there! If you have to open the console for anything else when not on exempted property you have still run afoul of Aggravated Unlawful use of a weapon.

[bob]

I would point out a couple things.

1. The ruling only applies to UUW. It would still be a class B misdemeanor under the wildlife act to have a gun in the console, even unloaded unless it was in a gun case as defined by the wildlife code.

2. Its still a class A misdemeanor to have it on public property without permission. Just don't drive through a park or a post office, or a school parking lot, etc.

[GarandFan]

bob, on Oct 8 2009, 03:14 PM, said:

I would point out a couple things.

1. The ruling only applies to UUW. It would still be a class B misdemeanor under the wildlife act to have a gun in the console, even unloaded unless it was in a gun case as defined by the wildlife code.

2. Its still a class A misdemeanor to have it on public property without permission. Just don't drive through a park or a post office, or a school parking lot, etc.

Streets and highways are public property.

[sirflyguy]

What about a purse with a zippered compartment?  Not that I use a purse, mind you!  I was just asked.

[GarandFan]

sirflyguy, on Oct 8 2009, 03:19 PM, said:

What about a purse with a zippered compartment?  Not that I use a purse, mind you!  I was just asked.

Seriously?

[asfried1]

This layered approach to the undermining of gun rights is diabolical.

[bob]

GarandFan, on Oct 8 2009, 03:15 PM, said:

bob, on Oct 8 2009, 03:14 PM, said:

I would point out a couple things.

1. The ruling only applies to UUW. It would still be a class B misdemeanor under the wildlife act to have a gun in the console, even unloaded unless it was in a gun case as defined by the wildlife code.

2. Its still a class A misdemeanor to have it on public property without permission. Just don't drive through a park or a post office, or a school parking lot, etc.

Streets and highways are public property.

The law actually words it as public lands rather than property. I think that may well exclude roadways, as I think there is some case law that roads are not lands. But IANAL.

[GarandFan]

asfried1, on Oct 8 2009, 03:57 PM, said:

This layered approach to the undermining of gun rights is diabolical.

This is abundantly clear if you listen to the orals.  The woman arguing for the state's attorney goes to considerable lengths to try and uphold this UUW charge.

Diabolical, indeed.  And we (the People) paid her to go to such lengths!!!

[Tvandermyde]

Bob has posted the same comment about the wildlife code here so I'll cross post my answer here.

1. A cop or CPO trying to enforce or write you up for a wildlife violation when not engaged in hunting or violation of the code such as poaching is on thin ice -- very thin ice.

2. the hidden campartment law was re-written to conform with the court ruling about illegal activitiy. I testified against the first re-write as it would criminalize keeping somehting hidden that is not illegal. So the new law goes to criminal intent.

As an aside, you should have seen the look on the AG's office face when they walked into us oppsoing them and that buzz saw. I love it when you catch them slack jawed.

3. Under the UUW statute, there is no qulifier that the case be designed for a gun. It was argued and rejected. The plain language of statute says any case. Don't try to mix up the two statutes and confuse transportation with hunting.

The hunting stuff is left over from another era when someone else had a hand in all this stuff. It's been over 10 years and I'm still trying to fix the mess they left us with. Maybe in another 10 I'll have it about done.

As for the issue of highways. Some have made the arguement about needing permission from every jurisidiction you would pass through to transport a firearm to try and comply with state law. It has never been interpretated that way. I only wish they would try somehting like that as it would create a fire storm. It would mean that I would have to get permission for at least a dozen counties plus towns when driving to my deer hunting spot. An absurd conclusion of the law. Not out of the realm of possibility with some of the narrow minded gun haters we have, but I think they know that is a bad thing to try and do.

But I'll try and work on a clean up bill to drop in the hopper at some point to quell the fears of some.

[abolt243]

Ocellairs, on Oct 8 2009, 01:28 PM, said:

abolt243, on Oct 8 2009, 12:55 PM, said:

I just went to my truck and looked, my console is "shut" as we speak. Everything in it is completely enclosed.

Tim

Whew thats a relief. Thought for sure that if the console hadn't been completely shut, that damn rat you have for a pet would get loose.

Not a chance, too many left over peanut butter crackers and half empty vienna sausage cans in there!!!!  He's in rat heaven!!
AB

[GarandFan]

abolt243, on Oct 8 2009, 05:46 PM, said:

Ocellairs, on Oct 8 2009, 01:28 PM, said:

abolt243, on Oct 8 2009, 12:55 PM, said:

I just went to my truck and looked, my console is "shut" as we speak. Everything in it is completely enclosed.

Tim

Whew thats a relief. Thought for sure that if the console hadn't been completely shut, that damn rat you have for a pet would get loose.

Not a chance, too many left over peanut butter crackers and half empty vienna sausage cans in there!!!!  He's in rat heaven!!
AB

Oh god, this thread has definately taken a turn for the worse (perhaps worst).

[Glock19]

This is great news!

So to sum up, I can put my pistol in my glove box next to a loaded magazine in the car glove box without a case for either?