New private transfer law?

[LYU370]

Maybe I'll access the ISP website a few times a day for a few weeks to check the status of my own FOID card. Who knows, Sheriff Lawn Dart might somehow get wind of all the approval codes and send someone over to see if I'm amassing an "ARSENAL OF WEAPONS".

[Uncle Harley]

As Todd would say, I think you are pole vaulting over Mouse poop. Nobody is suggesting that they not keep documentation. So if S makes B show Foid writes down the number and keeps it on file for 10 yrs. There is no violation of the FOID act. If he violates the new 710 whatever, it clearly states that it shall not be punishable as a crime or petty offense.

 

The way I look at it, they run BG checks on FOID holders daily, there is no reason they can not knock on his or her door within 24 hrs of getting a hit that it's no longer valid and confiscate it, so why would we even assume it's not valid if the state was doing THEIR JOB. If they want ME to do THEIR job, they had better start setting up a retirement plan for me and put me on the payroll.

[powderhead]

I think that we need to keep in mind that this law was hashed out during negotiations for CC and that there was some horse trading going on at that time. This is part of the horse trade. Without a doubt, I am convinced that the penalty will be added to the law this session.

[powderhead]

For that matter, just because you make the call it does not mean that a transaction took place. I simply means that you approved the potential buyer and seller. I think we should swamp the system by getting approvals for transactions that we never made.

[Phatty]

I think that we need to keep in mind that this law was hashed out during negotiations for CC and that there was some horse trading going on at that time. This is part of the horse trade. Without a doubt, I am convinced that the penalty will be added to the law this session.

That's a given.

[GUNS&LAWYERS]

As Todd would say, I think you are pole vaulting over Mouse poop. Nobody is suggesting that they not keep documentation. So if S makes B show Foid writes down the number and keeps it on file for 10 yrs. There is no violation of the FOID act. If he violates the new 710 whatever, it clearly states that it shall not be punishable as a crime or petty offense.

 

The way I look at it, they run BG checks on FOID holders daily, there is no reason they can not knock on his or her door within 24 hrs of getting a hit that it's no longer valid and confiscate it, so why would we even assume it's not valid if the state was doing THEIR JOB. If they want ME to do THEIR job, they had better start setting up a retirement plan for me and put me on the payroll.

 

Maybe this is reductio ad absurdum, however, you know what they call absurdity in the Daley Center...work product.

 

I'm just saying that to say there is no penalty for this silly law is just not true. There is no penalty for the unlawful sale or transfer violation...there are penalties for the FOID Act violation.

 

And I absolutely agree...the future will see the elimination of the exception in the unlawful sale/transfer statute. But I see worrying about that as the pole vaulting when there is currently a penalty they can apply through 430 ILCS 65.

[fubarud]

If the ISP wants to pay me to learn how to spot a fake FOID, as well as for my time to call in a check, I'll be glad to do it.

 

Until then, when I sell I gun, I don't check for FOID. That's not my job.

 

 

Todd V. & our reps had plenty of chances to eliminate the FOID and they did nothing. Most people I run into have no idea that FOID is IL specific and no other state has this nonsense.

[mrpapageorgio]

The site it up and running, I decided to test it with my FOID. I entered my FOID and DOB and a captcha. Next page gave me a green VALID and an approval number that gave me a link to a PDF form I could use as the transfer form. It didn't ask for any further details than that. I think I should be buying stock in pole vaults. (I'd upload screenshots, but I keep getting a 500 error)

[Uncle Harley]

Guns and Lawyers

 

 

Foid Act just requires that the buyer and seller have a valid foid and keep record for 10 yrs correct? and your question is, is it a Valid Foid if you didn't call and check? Correct? Well what do you make of this little nugget? For the purposes of this Section, a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card means (i) a Firearm Owner's Identification Card that has not expired or (ii) if the transferor is licensed as a federal firearms dealer under Section 923 of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 U.S.C. 923), an approval number issued in accordance with subsection (a-10) of Section 3 or Section 3.1 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act shall be proof that the Firearm Owner's Identification Card was valid.

[BrowningHP]

FOID must go.

 

Yes!

 

actually this new rule further underscores its inefficacy. this rule is ostensibly to make it harder for criminals/felons to get guns. but how many felons had a FOID in the first place? what percentage of illegal gun flow is this stopping? 0.01%? 0.0001%?

 

this is like a ship is sinking, and we supply the sailors with a teaspoon to help shovel the water out to keep it afloat...

• 
   
  

[GUNS&LAWYERS]

Guns and Lawyers

 

 

Foid Act just requires that the buyer and seller have a valid foid and keep record for 10 yrs correct? and your question is, is it a Valid Foid if you didn't call and check? Correct? Well what do you make of this little nugget? For the purposes of this Section, a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card means (i) a Firearm Owner's Identification Card that has not expired or (ii) if the transferor is licensed as a federal firearms dealer under Section 923 of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 U.S.C. 923), an approval number issued in accordance with subsection (a-10) of Section 3 or Section 3.1 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act shall be proof that the Firearm Owner's Identification Card was valid.

 

Again, we find that exception in the Criminal Code. And, if those exceptions in the Criminal Code can cross statutes, a person is probably ok.

 

So the argument would be that since a person would be exempt from conviction under the provisions of the Criminal Code, the same activity should not be punishable under the FOID Act even though there is no written exception in the FOID Act to the criminal activity. If that works, I think you're off the hook for the otherwise criminal activity of not checking the validity of the FOID card. However, I do think you are still going to be on the hook for the petty offense of failing to keep a record of the approval number because the law directed that you had to get an approval number and record it.

 

So, the most interesting question I have is whether the exceptions written into the unlawful sale/transfer statute will save you if charged with violating the FOID Act which carries its own penalties, and whether because the unlawful sale/transfer statute says a valid FOID is one that is unexpired would take precedence over the FOID Act which says you must call in to determine the validity of a FOID.

[powderhead]

The site it up and running, I decided to test it with my FOID. I entered my FOID and DOB and a captcha. Next page gave me a green VALID and an approval number that gave me a link to a PDF form I could use as the transfer form. It didn't ask for any further details than that. I think I should be buying stock in pole vaults. (I'd upload screenshots, but I keep getting a 500 error)

 

So where did you find the call number or web page? I jsut got off the ISP site, and I can"t find a thing about it.

[RANDY]

Go to the ISP website, and click on the FOID button toward the upper right corner, and the Electronic FOID check is at the bottom of the page.

[powderhead]

Got it. I ran a check on myself too. One thing that I noticed is that the check is valid for 30 days, so if you think that you may need one, you can print it out several weeks in advance.

[tchostler]

I think that we need to keep in mind that this law was hashed out during negotiations for CC and that there was some horse trading going on at that time. This is part of the horse trade. Without a doubt, I am convinced that the penalty will be added to the law this session.

Agreed, just make it a felony, that way jail time will be easy to figure. good thing sen. dick bought the new prison.

[Chinto]

I think since the State (concerned bureaucrats) do not trust the validity of the FOID card for more than 30 days, then maybe we as FOID card holders should be skeptical/concerned of our own FOID card's validity by every 30 days running a FOID card validity check on our own cards to make sure it is still valid for another 30 days. How would we otherwise know if it would become invalid? We all know that owning a firearm/ammunition is illegal w/o a valid FOID . Seems logical.

 

I can only imagine the statistics generated for the concerned bureaucrats on how many private transfers appear to be happening with all of those FOID validity checks every month and having no idea of what Is being sold/transferred. After all everyone must have a valid FOID otherwise you can not have a firearm/ammo.

[xd9subcompact]

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/98/098-0508.htm

 

The penalty section of the new law is located in Section 24-3 (A) (k). This is where it says in (k) (1) and (2):

(1) In addition to the other requirements of this paragraph (k), all persons who are not federally licensed firearms dealers must also have complied with subsection (a-10) of Section 3 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act by determining the validity of a purchaser's Firearm Owner's Identification Card. (2) All sellers or transferors who have complied with the requirements of subparagraph (1) of this paragraph (k) shall not be liable for damages in any civil action arising from the use or misuse by the transferee of the firearm transferred, except for willful or wanton misconduct on the part of the seller or transferor.

 

Which means you are required to call in for the transaction number. It also says that when you get the number, you become immune from liability (but you probably already were anyway IMHO).

 

Skipping down to (7) is where the penalty is spelled out for failure to comply with this section:

 

(7) Any person convicted of unlawful sale or delivery of firearms in violation of paragraph (k) of subsection (A) commits a Class 4 felony, except that a violation of subparagraph (1) of paragraph (k) of subsection (A) shall not be punishable as a crime or petty offense. A third or subsequent conviction for a violation of paragraph (k) of subsection (A) is a Class 1 felony.

 

So if you don't comply (twice) you are still a lawful person. Third time, you are a felon.

 

Anyone disagree with this assessment?

[GUNS&LAWYERS]

http://www.ilga.gov/...98/098-0508.htm

 

The penalty section of the new law is located in Section 24-3 (A) (k). This is where it says in (k) (1) and (2):

(1) In addition to the other requirements of this paragraph (k), all persons who are not federally licensed firearms dealers must also have complied with subsection (a-10) of Section 3 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act by determining the validity of a purchaser's Firearm Owner's Identification Card. (2) All sellers or transferors who have complied with the requirements of subparagraph (1) of this paragraph (k) shall not be liable for damages in any civil action arising from the use or misuse by the transferee of the firearm transferred, except for willful or wanton misconduct on the part of the seller or transferor.

 

Which means you are required to call in for the transaction number. It also says that when you get the number, you become immune from liability (but you probably already were anyway IMHO).

 

Skipping down to (7) is where the penalty is spelled out for failure to comply with this section:

 

(7) Any person convicted of unlawful sale or delivery of firearms in violation of paragraph (k) of subsection (A) commits a Class 4 felony, except that a violation of subparagraph (1) of paragraph (k) of subsection (A) shall not be punishable as a crime or petty offense. A third or subsequent conviction for a violation of paragraph (k) of subsection (A) is a Class 1 felony.

 

So if you don't comply (twice) you are still a lawful person. Third time, you are a felon.

 

Anyone disagree with this assessment?

 

I think that exception covers you for all violations under the unlawful sale/transfer statute. As pointed out earlier by someone, you probably never get convicted of violating this statute because you raise the exculpatory language as your defense.

 

The problem with reading the new law out of the public act is you don't get all of the context out of the parts of the statute it doesn't modify. The public act modified the unlawful sale/transfer, which you quoted, but it also inserted language into the FOID Act. The problem I see is the exception to punishment is only found in the unlawful sale/transfer portion. There is no exception in the FOID Act...so, I'm afraid the penalty section of it is still in full force.

 

The legislature could have put that same exception language into the FOID Act, but they didn't. It could be assumed that they didn't want to exempt the punishment from that law, or they overlooked it.

[MMcClery]

I could have sworn I read on here when this was passed that this was optional and it only gave the seller civil liability immunity when they had the approval from the system.

[kurt555gs]

What we need is a list of invalid FOID numbers that we all can punch in everyday making this system useless. Or better yet one FOID number that we know will be denied for 1000's of us to call in every single day.

 

/purple

 

Gort. Klaatu barada nikto.

[GUNS&LAWYERS]

A person can read anything on an internet forum. I just saw that Elvis was alive on another page.

 

Compliance with any law, in some sense, is optional. Right now you can drive 85 in a 55 if you want, but you are committing the crime of aggravated speeding and its punishable as a misdemeanor.

 

This law has no language which says its your option to participate. You are directed to make the call, just like you are directed to have the buyer display their FOID. The question is one of whether it is a punishable violation to ignore the new law.

[ilikemilitaria]

https://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/foidp2p.cfm

 

dave

[xd9subcompact]

The burden is on the state to prove the case. There is a requirement to keep a private sale record for 10 years. This is not new. The state has the difficulty of proving when you sold, if you sold, where you sold.

[xd9subcompact]

I think that exception covers you for all violations under the unlawful sale/transfer statute. As pointed out earlier by someone, you probably never get convicted of violating this statute because you raise the exculpatory language as your defense.

 

The problem with reading the new law out of the public act is you don't get all of the context out of the parts of the statute it doesn't modify. The public act modified the unlawful sale/transfer, which you quoted, but it also inserted language into the FOID Act. The problem I see is the exception to punishment is only found in the unlawful sale/transfer portion. There is no exception in the FOID Act...so, I'm afraid the penalty section of it is still in full force.

 

The legislature could have put that same exception language into the FOID Act, but they didn't. It could be assumed that they didn't want to exempt the punishment from that law, or they overlooked it.

Which part of the FOID act are you referring to, other than the part of the law I already quoted? Is it this?:

 

( Any person within this State who transfers or causes to be transferred any firearm, stun gun, or taser shall keep a record of such transfer for a period of 10 years from the date of transfer. Such record shall contain the date of the transfer; the description, serial number or other information identifying the firearm, stun gun, or taser if no serial number is available; and, if the transfer was completed within this State, the transferee's Firearm Owner's Identification Card number and any approval number or documentation provided by the Department of State Police pursuant to subsection (a-10) of this Section. On or after January 1, 2006, the record shall contain the date of application for transfer of the firearm. On demand of a peace officer such transferor shall produce for inspection such record of transfer. If the transfer or sale took place at a gun show, the record shall include the unique identification number. Failure to record the unique identification number or approval number is a petty offense.

[Mr. Fife]

 

actually this new rule further underscores its inefficacy. this rule is ostensibly to make it harder for criminals/felons to get guns. but how many felons had a FOID in the first place? what percentage of illegal gun flow is this stopping? 0.01%? 0.0001%?

 

You can't fix stupid. They still believe that criminals get their guns from law abiding citizens, and nothing is going to convince them otherwise. Years from now, when they realize that criminals are still able to get guns, they will write another law for the law abiding citizen to follow.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

[xd9subcompact]

Got it. I ran a check on myself too. One thing that I noticed is that the check is valid for 30 days, so if you think that you may need one, you can print it out several weeks in advance.

It won't help for you to get a transaction number yourself. It has to be the person who is transferring the gun to someone, not the other way around. Otherwise, anyone with an an ability to edit PDF's could make one of these up and the seller would never know.

[RockerXX]

The burden is on the state to prove the case. There is a requirement to keep a private sale record for 10 years. This is not new. The state has the difficulty of proving when you sold, if you sold, where you sold.

 

Or even if you sold it to any particular person...

 

For example you sold a gun to someone last year, that guy in turn sells it his friend, that friend perks the police interest and then names you as the seller to protect his friend, heck he might even forge paperwork... Basically short of a paper tail that can be verified it's all really hearsay...

 

I'm not saying a case could not be made and prosecuted, but it's a real uphill battle for the State unless you pretty much admit doing it and hand the case to them... I'm not suggesting you play games but the 'I lost them in a boating accident' funny still kind of applies...

[xd9subcompact]

What? my gun was used in a crime? Let me go look for it. OMG! it's gone! I didn't know! I guess now that I know, I am reporting it in accordance with the new lost and stolen law.

 

I may have taken residence in another state, I may live part year in one part the other. IL law can't apply once I leave the state. I may have had a record of the sale. I may have lost it while moving to the other state. I may have lost it while moving back to IL. Tough case to prove where,at best, we have a petty offense.

[RacerDave6]

Compliance with any law, in some sense, is optional. Right now you can drive 85 in a 55 if you want, but you are committing the crime of aggravated speeding and its punishable as a misdemeanor.

Now a Class B.

Damn, 30 overs is same penalty at going into a prohibited place.

 

'Speeding 26 mph over the posted limit will now be a tougher Class B misdemeanor and speeding 35 mph or more over the posted limit will be a Class A misdemeanor.'

[GUNS&LAWYERS]

I think that exception covers you for all violations under the unlawful sale/transfer statute. As pointed out earlier by someone, you probably never get convicted of violating this statute because you raise the exculpatory language as your defense.

 

The problem with reading the new law out of the public act is you don't get all of the context out of the parts of the statute it doesn't modify. The public act modified the unlawful sale/transfer, which you quoted, but it also inserted language into the FOID Act. The problem I see is the exception to punishment is only found in the unlawful sale/transfer portion. There is no exception in the FOID Act...so, I'm afraid the penalty section of it is still in full force.

 

The legislature could have put that same exception language into the FOID Act, but they didn't. It could be assumed that they didn't want to exempt the punishment from that law, or they overlooked it.

Which part of the FOID act are you referring to, other than the part of the law I already quoted? Is it this?:

 

( Any person within this State who transfers or causes to be transferred any firearm, stun gun, or taser shall keep a record of such transfer for a period of 10 years from the date of transfer. Such record shall contain the date of the transfer; the description, serial number or other information identifying the firearm, stun gun, or taser if no serial number is available; and, if the transfer was completed within this State, the transferee's Firearm Owner's Identification Card number and any approval number or documentation provided by the Department of State Police pursuant to subsection (a-10) of this Section. On or after January 1, 2006, the record shall contain the date of application for transfer of the firearm. On demand of a peace officer such transferor shall produce for inspection such record of transfer. If the transfer or sale took place at a gun show, the record shall include the unique identification number. Failure to record the unique identification number or approval number is a petty offense.

 

Yes, that is the part describing the failure to keep records as a petty offense. Further down, (430 ILCS 65-14e) is where you find any violation of the FOID Act, not independently listed for sentence, is a Class A misdemeanor. So, that would be the failure to make the call in unless the the exemption language from the other statute can ride in an save you, which I am not sure that it can.

 

I agree its the State's case to prove, of course, however, you're putting a lot of faith in the legal system if you think that when charged the jury or judge gets it right every time. I'm not suggesting that you won't get off the hook, I am suggesting that to say that there is no penalty for violating this law is just not correct.

 

And as far as the speeding, yeah, its really bad now. Misdemeanors, and not eligible for court supervision.