Jump to content

Vodoun da Vinci

Members
  • Posts

    407
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vodoun da Vinci

  1. Better to do something than to decide to do nothing. It's about decisions and deciding not to participate is probably the worst decision you can make. VooDoo
  2. No Consequences = No Compliance. There are seemingly no consequences for lower court judges who ignore SCOTUS or their precedents. So they will do as they wish with impunity. VooDoo
  3. Beretta Px4 compact has a rotating barrel and super mild recoil in 9mm but finding one to test will be tough. https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/review-beretta-px4-compact-part-1/ VooDoo
  4. Well that's me...ridiculous. You make no sense to me....fight an unconstitutional law but don't use their rules to guide us (which can be a felony) when our choices are do not comply, move yer **** out of State, Sell it, or register. You tell me. What's to be done? I'm out. Sincerely, I have made my decisions and hedged my bets. I have figured out my options and need no more from this forum. Good luck, sincerely. VooDoo
  5. Agreed. All we have at present are the emergency rules some of which are vague at best. In my opinion, the best we can do for now is look at The Pica Guide and read the flow charts and descriptions of what constitutes an """assault weapon""" under the present rules. Basically any semi auto that can accept a large ammunition feeding device and has one (or more) of the """assault weapon""" attachments including (but not limited to) collapsing/folding/thumb hole stocks, flash hiders, threaded barrels, pistol grips, etc constitutes an """assault weapon""". So. after looking at Ruger's options and available variants of the 10/22 (super thanks for the heads up!) there are obviously some that will fall into the banned category even though they are stock/unmodified. https://ruger.com/products/1022/overview.html The Takedown Lite looks to have a shroud and a threaded barrel. A number of variants have threaded barrels. Pretty sure the Target model has a thumbhole stock. So, yeah, there is no simple one size fits all answer and until we get JCAR to give us a finished set of rules it looks like we'll have to play this game. I actually had my State senators office forward a list to their contacts at the ISP and got a response (finally) that is vague/incorrect according to the Pica Guide and FAQ's. It's pretty obvious that the ISP Rules and Definitions are flawed and vague. IMO. Bob Morgans people told me to "just register everything you have" to make sure I covered all the bases. It's a mess, but we all know that. VooDoo
  6. Pictures from the PICA Guide.....which hasn't been adopted by JCAR so who knows if it will change before the rules become adopted. VooDoo
  7. You guys know lots of Stuff and I thank you for imparting the tidbits. It helps me process the dilemma we are in. VooDoo
  8. I found this: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S1-4-3/ALDE_00013522/#:~:text=The Supreme Court has repeatedly,attorneys who engage in misconduct.&text=See United Mine Workers%2C 330 U.S. at 299.&text=18 U.S.C.,§ 401. So they have the power but I'm still searching for examples/precedents where they have actually done it. VooDoo
  9. I'm seriously asking because I'm ignorant - exactly what are the consequences for a lower court judge that ignores or even flouts SCOTUS precedent? If say, the purchased/bribed justices on the Illinois Supreme Court openly defy/flout and disregard SCOTUS precedent, what exactly are the consequences for thumbing their nose at the highest court in the land? VooDoo
  10. There's like 4 days after today to complete disclosure affidavits. I think maybe anyone who has waited to the last minute to see what happens are making their choices here the next few days so we can expect that number (maybe?) to jump up. VooDoo
  11. I won't be registering....my stuff is now safely secured outside the State of Illinois. Like the folks who have not the resources to replace all their mags with 15 round compliant CCL mags, my heart goes out to folks who have not the resources to get their ""assault weapons"" and Attachments out of State and will be forced to fill out disclosure affidavits or potentially become felons. This sucks, Illinois. VooDoo
  12. Completely agreed. My heart goes out to those concealed carry aficionados in need of adapting to this PICA travesty and not having the available funds to make it happen. Yes - by design. VooDoo
  13. I'm taking the whole PICA thing as well as other Life changes to reduce my "collection" and concentrate on carry pistols. For my Beretta Px4 carry guns I just purchased 15 round magazines for the full size and magazine adapters so the 15 round full size mags integrate seamlessly with my Px4 Subcompact. So while PICA seemed designed to limit my carry capacity (how a 15 round mag makes anyone safer than a 17 round mag still boggles my mind....) from 17 down to 15, the 15 round mags now give me added capacity over the original 13 round mags for the subcompact. So when i carry my full size with 15+1 and my subcompact as a backup with 15+1 plus an extra 15 round mag I get 47 rounds as opposed to 17+1, 13+1 and a 17 round spare mag with 49 total rounds. So a lot a mish mash BS just to only limit me by 2 rounds. I'm sure everyone will be a lot safer now which should make Mom's and Pritzker happy. VooDoo
  14. In my opinion they are making stuff up as they go along. I have not seen anything I remember in writing that makes an exception for .22 - if it is semiauto and has one or more attachments then it needs to have a disclosure affidavit filled out or possession, regardless of caliber, is illegal after Jan. 1. That much seems pretty clear to me unlike a lot of the rules. VooDoo
  15. The caliber does not make an exception. Any semiautomatic pistol that can accept a detachable magazine and has one of more of the """assault weapon""" attachments (Including a threaded barrel) are now banned. Like the Ruger MkIV 22/45 with threaded barrel. No longer legal for sale in Illinois and would require a disclosure Affidavit to possess legally. VooDoo
  16. I'm trying to get my head past the fact that there are 10 "assault weapons" bans in the US currently - California, Connecticut, Delaware, D.C., Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Washington. The SCOTUS has yet to strike any of these down so to assume it will be different with Illinois is pie-in-the-sky. Even with the political hanky panky and bribing/buying of Justices by Pritzker SCOTUS has not seen fit to delay or stay registration and is letting this travesty play itself out in the lower courts. I hope I'm wrong but I think Amerika is in the twilight of gun ownership. I have a bad feeling that SCOTUS is not gonna save US. We'll see.
  17. So as I understand it, at this point, SCOTUS has refused to intervene and stop this train until all of these cases have been litigated to a dead stop in the lower courts. As was expected by some/many. I'm not able to keep up *but* I have been following it closely. Amongst those who are savvy in this kind of thing, is it not probable that this will take years (if ever) before it is seen/evaluated by SCOTUS? Seems to me Coney-Barrett could have stepped in and halted registration until some of this can be resolved but did not/will not and so it sits until the Illinois Supreme Court has it's say and we all know how that's gonna turn out, Aren't we likely looking at years here now? VooDoo
  18. Their amusement is unseemly to me.....I have relatives in Red States that get a kick out of our troubles. But it's coming to a State near them via Federal Legislation and I think it's possible we'll see a PICA type law Federally in the coming years. I intend to enjoy my firearms as long as I can......hiding them under the bed, out of State, or selling them right now seems like a waste of precious time. I wanna shoot them while I can. VooDoo
×
×
  • Create New...