Tvandermyde, on 24 January 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:
XJCraver, on 24 January 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:
Incorrect. The WC is state statute, just like any other law. Break it, regardless what activity you are engaged in, and get charged with a UUW/AUUW. Any ruling that does not remove the pertinent parts of the Wildlife Code does nothing for us as gun owners.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
for the last time, YOUR WRONG. I can't be changred with a Wildlife code violation for transporting a firearm if I am not engaged in the activity of hunting, trapping or fishing. That would be the same as charging me for not having a hunting license while shooting on my friends farm, even though no hunting was involved.
I don't know where all the tinfoil hats come from thinking that the Wildlife Code overrides the criminal code. If that were the case, Cook County would already have the means to charge us for not using a firearms case when transporting. You guys who continue to perpetuate this Bull @#%& need to get some fresh air and have your head examined.
If that were the case, then why when I drive around with a 1911 on the front seat in a case, do I not get charged with a Wildlife Code Violation? and i have been pulled over and asked about my gun more than once.
Why did the Supreme Court of Illinois REJECT the Cook County arguement of adopting the Wildlife Code definition in Diggins?
because the Wildlife Code does NOT apply.
I apologize for saying you could be charged with UUW/AUUW
, as that is incorrect. My apologies for that, I should quit posting when I'm on my phone and in a hurry. However, the argument that the Wildlife Code doesn't override the criminal code is flawed, because the W.C. IS the criminal code. The "ILCS" stands for "Illinois Compiled Statutes", after all. A law is a law.
See here ---> http://www.ilga.gov/...3Â Â That's
the entirety of the Wildlife Code. The pertinent pieces of it are below:
(520 ILCS 5/1.15) (from Ch. 61, par. 1.15) states that "All authorized employees of the Department, duly accredited officers of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and all sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, and other peace officers
shall be empowered to arrest any person detected in violation of any of the provisions of this Act, including administrative rules. , etc."
(520 ILCS 5/1.16) (from Ch. 61, par. 1.16) states that all State's Attorneys shall enforce the provisions of the Wildlife code
(520 ILCS 5/2.33) (from Ch. 61, par. 2.33) (n) states that "It is unlawful for any person, except persons who possess a permit to hunt from a vehicle as provided in this Section and persons otherwise permitted by law, to have or carry any gun in or on any vehicle, conveyance or aircraft, unless such gun is unloaded and enclosed in a case, except that at field trials authorized by Section 2.34 of this Act, unloaded guns or guns loaded with blank cartridges only, may be carried on horseback while not contained in a case, or to have or carry any bow or arrow device in or on any vehicle unless such bow or arrow device is unstrung or enclosed in a case, or otherwise made inoperable."
Now, what would a rational person believe, with regard to these three sections of the act? I believe he would believe that (per 1.15) cops are cops and can arrest you. He would believe that (per 1.16) the State's Att'y will prosecute you. And he would further believe that (per 2.33) if he had a weapon in his vehicle that was not unloaded and in a case, he would be charged with a crime if a police officer caught him. ANY peace officer could make the arrest, which is a fairly important point here.
So, imagine that the judge in this case rules in our favor, the state doesn't appeal, and we are granted de-facto carry (at least until the legislature acts). Show me where I'm wrong when I say that we are still
going to be arrested for violating 520 ILCS 5/2.33. Nothing I've read in the Wildlife Code says you have to be physically engaged in the act of hunting at the time of arrest for the above statute.
And, in regards to this particular sentence of your post: "If that were the case, then why when I drive around with a 1911 on the front seat in a case, do I not get charged with a Wildlife Code Violation? and i have been pulled over and asked about my gun more than once." Why would you be charged with anything? You can have any weapon in any vehicle so long as it's unloaded and encased, I drive around with one in my truck very legally every day; I'm missing your point with that sentence.
I'm not trying to be a ____, really. I've read the W.C. over and over and don't see what I'm missing. I just want someone to explain it to me. And I'd really appreciate it if they did it without the tin-foil-hat and bovine excrement references. If I want to be talked down to, I'll talk to my mother in law...
Edited by XJCraver, 24 January 2012 - 07:55 PM.