Cook County High Capacity Mags Question.

[Stratomaster18]

I know that handguns are preempted by state law, but what about rifle mags? I'm particularly interested in the bx-25 mags for the 10/22. I am in Cook County, specifically Orland Park, which is home rule. I've searched many a time for municipal ordinances for Orland Park regarding gun laws but have never found anything.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!

[Vaden]

Get a Ruger Charger, then they are pistol mags that just happen to have backwards compatibility with the nations number 1 plinking rifle.

[cm.stites]

rifle magazines were not preempted but since those magazines are for a pistol it might be a possiblity

[defaultdotxbe]

There is still some question over whether courts will rule that pistol mags are preempted, but the AFAIK the Cook ban has never been enforced anyway

[Capt_Destro]

You shouldn't even need a Ruger Charger for them to be considered pistol magazines. If I have Glock magazines but no glock is that a crime?

[Yas]

Orland's posting on the Isp web site.

 

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/ordinances/orlandpark.pdf

 

Looks like it was from 2003. Beware they thought they were very special, just like Chicago's aldermen think they are. I've found Orland to be very over bering on business with regulation on sales in order to restrict arms and ammunition in retail. Notice any ammunition in the Orland Dicks sporting goods or Walmart?

[Stratomaster18]

Yeah i have to go to the Tinley dicks and crestwood walmart for ammo. I've read that ordinance before and just re read it now. It only talks about dealers. Because of this I've always been unsure of the rules pertaining to possession. People I've talked to dont seem to know either. Very frustrating.

[defaultdotxbe]

Yeah i have to go to the Tinley dicks and crestwood walmart for ammo. I've read that ordinance before and just re read it now. It only talks about dealers. Because of this I've always been unsure of the rules pertaining to possession. People I've talked to dont seem to know either. Very frustrating.

Unless the local ordinance directly contradicts it the Cook ban applies, but as I said that hasn't been enforced

 

It looks like the Orland ordinance only to selling (or giving away) firearms, ammo or magazines, not owning them for yourself, so technically you are under the Cook ban

[kevinmcc]

I know that handguns are preempted by state law, but what about rifle mags? I'm particularly interested in the bx-25 mags for the 10/22. I am in Cook County, specifically Orland Park, which is home rule. I've searched many a time for municipal ordinances for Orland Park regarding gun laws but have never found anything.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!

 

This has been debated before.

 

When I read the law, only handguns are preempted not magazines.

 

I would suspect magazines, handgun or rifle will be limited in some areas until a court case challenge.

 

Then what is a rifle magazine? There are AK pistol, AR pistols, etc...

[WindyCityGuy]

I know that handguns are preempted by state law, but what about rifle mags? I'm particularly interested in the bx-25 mags for the 10/22. I am in Cook County, specifically Orland Park, which is home rule. I've searched many a time for municipal ordinances for Orland Park regarding gun laws but have never found anything.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!

 

This has been debated before.

 

When I read the law, only handguns are preempted not magazines.

 

I would suspect magazines, handgun or rifle will be limited in some areas until a court case challenge.

 

Then what is a rifle magazine? There are AK pistol, AR pistols, etc...

 

+1

[2AFOREVER]

I know that handguns are preempted by state law, but what about rifle mags? I'm particularly interested in the bx-25 mags for the 10/22. I am in Cook County, specifically Orland Park, which is home rule. I've searched many a time for municipal ordinances for Orland Park regarding gun laws but have never found anything.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks!

 

I have spent many, many hours on the firearm ordinances here in Orland. Way too much to explain in a post. In a nut shell no ordinance on owning. A conversation with our anti chief of police also confirmed this. Feel free to pm me your phone number and I would be glad to explain.

[Hazborgufen]

I live in Park Ridge. Back in July we unanimously rejected any new restrictions. Does the new Cook County ban apply to us even though we are a home rule entity? If so, by what mechanism? During the discussion in July our city's attorney indicated that the old Cook County ban did not apply to Park Ridge residents.

 

I can't find the text of the new law either as the link to the Municipal Code on Cook County's website doesn't show the changes.

[defaultdotxbe]

I live in Park Ridge. Back in July we unanimously rejected any new restrictions. Does the new Cook County ban apply to us even though we are a home rule entity? If so, by what mechanism? During the discussion in July our city's attorney indicated that the old Cook County ban did not apply to Park Ridge residents.

 

I can't find the text of the new law either as the link to the Municipal Code on Cook County's website doesn't show the changes.

They added this part:

 

( a ) The provisions included in this division apply to all persons in Cook County including but not

limited to persons licensed under this article.

( b ) As provided in Article VII, Section 6©, of the State of Illinois Constitution of 1970, if this article

conflicts with an ordinance of a municipality, the municipal ordinance shall prevail within its jurisdiction.

 

personally I don't see why that would not have ever been the case, but there are questions as to who enforces the law and where since the sheriffs police do not have primary jurisdiction in incorporated areas

[Hazborgufen]

So despite the fact that the City unanimously rejected a new restriction we are saddled with one anyway? And because the concealed carry law prevents any new ordinances at this point we couldn't pass one now that basically says "Park Ridge Rejects Cook County's Restrictions?"

[d38runner]

So despite the fact that the City unanimously rejected a new restriction we are saddled with one anyway? And because the concealed carry law prevents any new ordinances at this point we couldn't pass one now that basically says "Park Ridge Rejects Cook County's Restrictions?"

 

I don't think Park Ridge is subject to Cook County's gun laws (isn't it home rule?).

[defaultdotxbe]

So despite the fact that the City unanimously rejected a new restriction we are saddled with one anyway? And because the concealed carry law prevents any new ordinances at this point we couldn't pass one now that basically says "Park Ridge Rejects Cook County's Restrictions?"

I think they could still pass that. They are prevented from passing an assault weapon ban, but an ordinance saying the Cook ban doesn't apply would not technically be an assault weapon ban

 

I don't think Park Ridge is subject to Cook County's gun laws (isn't it home rule?).

I never understood why people would think this way. Why would a higher jurisdiction not apply just because a lower jurisdiction exists? Cook county is home rule but no one thinks that means state law doesn't apply. Home rule only applies when a city ordinance directly conflicts with the county, like Chicago and their 15rd magazine cap vs Cook's 10rd cap

[sdf4]

move to my little hamlet. We have have home rule and STRONGLY reject ANY cook county firearms bans. We go by state law this stems from city of chicago and cook county trying to buy the land up in the 1890s and a vicicus fight over our quary mining. before and after incorporating

[d38runner]

I don't think Park Ridge is subject to Cook County's gun laws (isn't it home rule?).

I never understood why people would think this way. Why would a higher jurisdiction not apply just because a lower jurisdiction exists? Cook county is home rule but no one thinks that means state law doesn't apply. Home rule only applies when a city ordinance directly conflicts with the county, like Chicago and their 15rd magazine cap vs Cook's 10rd cap

 

I should have been a little more clear (I got lazy). I believe Park Ridge is exempt from the Cook County AWB because it is homerule AND its police chief or someone high up stated that it follows state law when it comes to gun laws. I discussed this at length in another thread, and one of the guys there stated he had a letter from the Chief of Police stating that Park Ridge follows state gun laws, not Cook County. From a technical legal standpoint, I kind of agree with you: Park Ridge doesn't seem to have any law on the books that directly contradicts the Cook County AWB, but when it comes to figuring out how this homerule stuff works, especially with respect to gun laws, it seems that technical legal points don't always apply.

[AlphaKoncepts aka CGS]

Got two discussions nearly the same? http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=41787&hl=

[03rev]

Got two discussions nearly the same? http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=41787&hl=

 

And then there is this one that Todd says magazines are preempted.

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=40759&hl=%2Bhandgun+%2Bmagazines

[defaultdotxbe]

I don't think Park Ridge is subject to Cook County's gun laws (isn't it home rule?).

I never understood why people would think this way. Why would a higher jurisdiction not apply just because a lower jurisdiction exists? Cook county is home rule but no one thinks that means state law doesn't apply. Home rule only applies when a city ordinance directly conflicts with the county, like Chicago and their 15rd magazine cap vs Cook's 10rd cap

 

I should have been a little more clear (I got lazy). I believe Park Ridge is exempt from the Cook County AWB because it is homerule AND its police chief or someone high up stated that it follows state law when it comes to gun laws. I discussed this at length in another thread, and one of the guys there stated he had a letter from the Chief of Police stating that Park Ridge follows state gun laws, not Cook County. From a technical legal standpoint, I kind of agree with you: Park Ridge doesn't seem to have any law on the books that directly contradicts the Cook County AWB, but when it comes to figuring out how this homerule stuff works, especially with respect to gun laws, it seems that technical legal points don't always apply.

Yeah, its all very muddy. Since its a county ordinance the Sheriff's Police would enforce it, but they don't have primary jurisdiction in incorporated areas so it would be up to the local PD to call in the Sheriff's Police for any AWB issues and if they simply choose not to there isn't much that the county can do

[AJR]

To make matters even worse, here is a snip from an email from a couple of weeks back, from NRA-ILA stating that the ban is still in effect.

 

 

http://graphics.nra.org/ila/leg_alert/572-blank.jpg Illinois: Chicago Anti-Gun Laws to be Overhauled Following Passage of State Concealed Carry Law http://graphics.nra.org/ila/leg_alert/line.gif

This week, the Chicago City Council Committee on Public Safety approved Ordinance O2013-5015, a rewrite of the city’s current gun control laws. The City of Chicago must update provisions of the Municipal Code regarding firearms in order to comply with the preemption clauses in recently passed concealed carry legislation. This amended ordinance will go before the full City Council for a vote tomorrow, September 11.

If the City Council passes this amended ordinance tomorrow, the following pro-gun changes will be made to current Chicago firearm laws:

• No requirement to register lawfully owned firearms, eliminating the necessity to obtain a Chicago Firearms Permit (CFP).
  
• No requirement to complete the five additional hours of training required to obtain a CFP.
  
• May possess and transport lawfully owned handguns outside of the home.
  
• No prohibition from carrying or possessing ammunition.
   
  

These proposed changes are a step in the right direction for law-abiding Chicago gun owners. However, a ban on semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines is still current law. While this proposed ordinance will not rid the city of all of its anti-gun laws, this rewrite will finally provide some relief for law-abiding Chicagoans.

Your NRA-ILA will continue to keep you updated on this and other Second Amendment issues.

[Talonap]

To make matters even worse, here is a snip from an email from a couple of weeks back, from NRA-ILA stating that the ban is still in effect.

 

 

http://graphics.nra.org/ila/leg_alert/572-blank.jpg Illinois: Chicago Anti-Gun Laws to be Overhauled Following Passage of State Concealed Carry Law http://graphics.nra.org/ila/leg_alert/line.gif

 

This week, the Chicago City Council Committee on Public Safety approved Ordinance O2013-5015, a rewrite of the city’s current gun control laws. The City of Chicago must update provisions of the Municipal Code regarding firearms in order to comply with the preemption clauses in recently passed concealed carry legislation. This amended ordinance will go before the full City Council for a vote tomorrow, September 11.

If the City Council passes this amended ordinance tomorrow, the following pro-gun changes will be made to current Chicago firearm laws:

• No requirement to register lawfully owned firearms, eliminating the necessity to obtain a Chicago Firearms Permit (CFP).
  
• No requirement to complete the five additional hours of training required to obtain a CFP.
  
• May possess and transport lawfully owned handguns outside of the home.
  
• No prohibition from carrying or possessing ammunition.
  

 

These proposed changes are a step in the right direction for law-abiding Chicago gun owners. However, a ban on semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines is still current law. While this proposed ordinance will not rid the city of all of its anti-gun laws, this rewrite will finally provide some relief for law-abiding Chicagoans.

Your NRA-ILA will continue to keep you updated on this and other Second Amendment issues.

 

Yes, for RIFLES and standard capacity RIFLE magazines. Handguns have total preemption.

[defaultdotxbe]

Yes, for RIFLES and standard capacity RIFLE magazines. Handguns have total preemption.

That's not what Chicago or the NRA-ILA seems to think. Not to mention Cook county and about a dozen other towns and villages in Cook

[Capt_Destro]

Yes, for RIFLES and standard capacity RIFLE magazines. Handguns have total preemption.

That's not what Chicago or the NRA-ILA seems to think. Not to mention Cook county and about a dozen other towns and villages in Cook

 

If Todd says they are pre-empted it's good enough for me.

 

Why should we go by what Chicago/Cook County/Oak Park thinks or follow what ever unconstituional ordinance they propose?

-Chicago lost 2nd Amendment court cases like panties are lost on prom night.

-Cook County tried acting like the 7th's ruling was not applicable.

-Cook and Chicago still banned certain pistols that are pre-empted by state law.

-Chicago and lasers..

-Chicago is trying to extort businesses into banning carry through withholding liquor licenses.

-Chicago originally tried to get away with regulating carry with their safe school zones. it wasn't amended until they were called out on it.

 

You are taking Chicago/Cook and those municipalities seriously why? I'll have my standard capacity magazines because they are pre-empted. Heck if it can be used in a pistol it is pre-empted. They have no way to enforce a magazine ban under the state law. Uzi Mags= Pistol or Rifle, AK magazines= Pistol/Rifle, Glock Magazines= Pistol/Rifle, Pmags= Pistol/Rifle. The burden of proof does not lie on the accused.

 

How can the municipality or county show any burden of proof? You don't need to own a pistol to have them pre-empted. What are they going to do execute a search warrant? What if your pistol is not on the premises or is stored elsewhere? What kind of detached magistrate would waste his time giving permission for this on a law abiding citizen who has no criminal record? Especially on a an ordinance that has legal issues in regards to conflicting with state law.

 

Those who say the magazine bans still stand, please enlighten me.

 

They know they can't enforce it, the whole purpose of putting it on the books is to make it difficult to order online. They want to give gun owners the hardest time possible.

 

If anyone is arrested on a contradictory magazine ban, it will be one heck of a pay out.

[defaultdotxbe]

I just don't think its that simple nor that it will necessarily guarantee a big pay out, so I can't in good conscious see advice be given to that effect without posting a counterpoint in the interest of people making informed decisions

[03rev]

Yes, for RIFLES and standard capacity RIFLE magazines. Handguns have total preemption.

That's not what Chicago or the NRA-ILA seems to think. Not to mention Cook county and about a dozen other towns and villages in Cook

 

If Todd says they are pre-empted it's good enough for me.

 

Why should we go by what Chicago/Cook County/Oak Park thinks or follow what ever unconstituional ordinance they propose?

-Chicago lost 2nd Amendment court cases like panties are lost on prom night.

-Cook County tried acting like the 7th's ruling was not applicable.

-Cook and Chicago still banned certain pistols that are pre-empted by state law.

-Chicago and lasers..

-Chicago is trying to extort businesses into banning carry through withholding liquor licenses.

-Chicago originally tried to get away with regulating carry with their safe school zones. it wasn't amended until they were called out on it.

 

You are taking Chicago/Cook and those municipalities seriously why? I'll have my standard capacity magazines because they are pre-empted. Heck if it can be used in a pistol it is pre-empted. They have no way to enforce a magazine ban under the state law. Uzi Mags= Pistol or Rifle, AK magazines= Pistol/Rifle, Glock Magazines= Pistol/Rifle, Pmags= Pistol/Rifle. The burden of proof does not lie on the accused.

 

How can the municipality or county show any burden of proof? You don't need to own a pistol to have them pre-empted. What are they going to do execute a search warrant? What if your pistol is not on the premises or is stored elsewhere? What kind of detached magistrate would waste his time giving permission for this on a law abiding citizen who has no criminal record? Especially on a an ordinance that has legal issues in regards to conflicting with state law.

 

Those who say the magazine bans still stand, please enlighten me.

 

They know they can't enforce it, the whole purpose of putting it on the books is to make it difficult to order online. They want to give gun owners the hardest time possible.

 

If anyone is arrested on a contradictory magazine ban, it will be one heck of a pay out.

X100!!!

[Tvandermyde]

Yes, for RIFLES and standard capacity RIFLE magazines. Handguns have total preemption.

That's not what Chicago or the NRA-ILA seems to think. Not to mention Cook county and about a dozen other towns and villages in Cook

 

What ILA was reffering to was that they still have mag bans of sorts. i.e bans on rifle mags of 20 round or 30 round

 

more to follow

[kevinmcc]

Got two discussions nearly the same? http://illinoiscarry...c=41787&hl=

 

And then there is this one that Todd says magazines are preempted.

http://illinoiscarry...dgun +magazines

 

I trust Todd's belief in the intent of the law, but practice is an entirely different thing.

 

What Chicago, Crook County, and other locations do does not have to be within the intent of the law.

 

I would expect them to test the limits of the law.

[Tvandermyde]

I guess I will have to quit carrying my 1911 and switch to a 9 for a while and see what happens