RichieRich Posted July 23, 2020 at 05:59 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 05:59 PM I live in Chicago where the mag capacity is 10rds. I have a hellcat which is well over 10. If I only have 10 rounds in a larger capacity mag is that still the same or does the actual mag have to be 10? I travel with it but don't carry my hellcat. Don't want to be stopped with that specific gun on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WitchDoctor Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:29 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:29 PM Here is the odd thing as I understand it:15 in Chicago10 in Kook CountyGo figure. Someone please correct me if i am wrong too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:31 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:31 PM Chicago muni code is 15 rd handgun cap. Cook county is 10. State has handgun preemption, but never tested in court afaik. Any reported charged has been an add on to other issues. Muni code is written as the mag is declared to be contraband and shall be seized by and forfeited to the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmagloo Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:32 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:32 PM Imho, my carry gun has far more than 10 rounds, and I'm keeping it full. The only time the Crook County authorities will ever know how many rounds I have, is if I have to use it to protect my, or my families life, and a bad guy(s) is on the ground. In that scenario, I could careless if they want to pursue a misdemeanor, which they won't if my self-defense was justified. Don't get me going on my Crimson trace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:46 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:46 PM Just adding that Chicago's ordinance supercedes the county ordinance within Chicago, both of which are arguably preempted by state statute for concealed carry licensees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator4838 Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:48 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:48 PM I believe they sometimes Trump up charges on bad guys with that high cap charge that more than likely gets thrown out anyway.I do not see cpd counting rounds on any compliant,lawful,ccl holder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:56 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:56 PM With preemption, any magazine that comes from the factory when you purchase a handgun is legal with a CCL. Then again, do you want to be the test case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 23, 2020 at 07:11 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 07:11 PM With preemption, any magazine that comes from the factory when you purchase a handgun is legal with a CCL. Then again, do you want to be the test case? I don't think state preemption specifies the source of the magazines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab Posted July 23, 2020 at 07:17 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 07:17 PM With preemption, any magazine that comes from the factory when you purchase a handgun is legal with a CCL. Then again, do you want to be the test case?I don't think state preemption specifies the source of the magazines. I understand. My thought is that sometimes other companies make extended round magazines which hold more than the factory magazines. I would be careful about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted July 23, 2020 at 08:26 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 08:26 PM I’m curious about the need to worry about carrying a loaded firearm with more than 10 rounds on the factory mag.If you have a carry license, then you are carrying that firearm concealed yes?This question comes up here on many occasions and it’s always the same. Unless you are doing something wrong, or drawing attention to yourself, why would anyone even the police know you have a firearm? Less stress is better for you.As reported here and several links before there has not been anyone charged and convicted of this mag ordinance.Most if charged had other reasons to be concerned and the mag charges were dropped as the city/county do not wish to have this in front of a judge. State preemption is the key, although it’s not spelled out as mags just spelled out as firearm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talonap Posted July 23, 2020 at 08:55 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 08:55 PM Just adding that Chicago's ordinance supercedes the county ordinance within Chicago, both of which are arguably preempted by state statute for concealed carry licensees. And also for FOID ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted July 23, 2020 at 10:00 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 10:00 PM When one reads the statute (FCCA) and attempts to follow along you get the sense that a loaded handgun/firearm would need ammo and that ammo would based upon design need to be in a magazine.It doesn't say anywhere that the handgun/firearm must be a revolver or semi automatic, just that it is a handgun/firearm carried concealed. So since it doesn't say we can't have magazines of more than 10 rounds one would assume that what ever make/model handgun/firearm you buy that the magazines would be OK to use.Case in point the magazine limit ban in certain states which then require the maker of said handguns/firearms to ONLY sell those which have a limited capacity. And when purchasing additional ones they too must be of the limited capacity. Now the fun starts, and we have all been over it but it's as plain as the nose on all our faces and right before our eyes. (430 ILCS 66/90) Sec. 90. Preemption. The regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State. Any ordinance or regulation, or portion thereof, enacted on or before the effective date of this Act that purports to impose regulations or restrictions on licensees or handguns and ammunition for handguns in a manner inconsistent with this Act shall be invalid in its application to licensees under this Act on the effective date of this Act. This Section is a denial and limitation of home rule powers and functions under subsection (h) of Section 6 of Article VII of the Illinois Constitution.(Source: P.A. 98-63, eff. 7-9-13.) I like this part best: Any ordinance or regulation, or portion thereof, enacted on or before the effective date of this Act that purports to impose regulations or restrictions on licensees or handguns and ammunition for handguns in a manner inconsistent with this Act shall be invalid Enacted ON or BEFORE the effective date! Everyone should or does know that handguns/firearms come with and are therefore designed together with a magazine which is made to function smoothly with that handgun/firearm! Again, based upon the posts made herein and the omission of any links otherwise, no one has been convicted of a magazine capacity limit "On or After" the said statute! Enjoy I've had fun and now I must rest my fingers...think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted July 23, 2020 at 11:09 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 11:09 PM If I recall correctly, which I may not, previous posts have made mention of the transcript/debate of this topic in the GA and it was discussed as being the intent of a covered item although not being specifically called out in legislation. IANAL. I can be forgetful. Does anyone have a link to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted July 23, 2020 at 11:20 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 11:20 PM If I recall correctly, which I may not, previous posts have made mention of the transcript/debate of this topic in the GA and it was discussed as being the intent of a covered item although not being specifically called out in legislation. IANAL. I can be forgetful. Does anyone have a link to that?You are correct. Rep. Brandon Phelps specifically said that mags also fell under the pre-emption statute. But there are those that still want to argue that magazine capacities are not covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 23, 2020 at 11:50 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 11:50 PM If I recall correctly, which I may not, previous posts have made mention of the transcript/debate of this topic in the GA and it was discussed as being the intent of a covered item although not being specifically called out in legislation. IANAL. I can be forgetful. Does anyone have a link to that? SB114 of the 98th General Assembly was the first trailer bill passed on the FCCA. During House debate, in response to questioning by Representative Sullivan intended to define legislative intent, Representative Phelps responded: Absolutely, Representative. Any unit or local government cannot regulate how you carry a concealed firearm, where you can carry it, what type of ammunition you can carry, how much you carry, the type of sights you use, the size of the magazine. The total and complete regulation of the carrying of a firearm is the sole exclusive jurisdiction of this Body. Regardless of what the aldermen in the City of Chicago think or want, we... we did not give decision makers on this issue, we are. The state only. House Floor Debate begins at the bottom of Page 16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:07 AM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:07 AM Thanks mauserme. Now do we start a pool to see how long before this comes up again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:27 AM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:27 AM Bubba “ I fixed the magazine issue” InterestedBystander “How you do that Bubba?” Bubba “I called ABC” Mauserme “Good, then it’s done!” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishjames Posted July 24, 2020 at 02:28 AM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 02:28 AM Thanks mauserme. Now do we start a pool to see how long before this comes up again? Sooner than later, judging by the number of people applying for FOIDs and CCLs recently. When the words "test case" show up in any thread, be assured the issue hasn't been fully resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 24, 2020 at 12:10 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 12:10 PM Thanks mauserme. Now do we start a pool to see how long before this comes up again? Sooner than later, judging by the number of people applying for FOIDs and CCLs recently.When the words "test case" show up in any thread, be assured the issue hasn't been fully resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Sometimes the problem with insisting on a test case to provide the answer is that, if the activity is legal, there never will be a test case because no law has been broken. Yet, the test case crowd will continue to insist we don't know for lack of that test case that will never come. It's the difference between understanding that everything we do is legal unless made illegal, versus waiting for permission from a legal system that isn't designed to grant permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybermgk Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:16 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:16 PM If I only have 10 rounds in a larger capacity mag is that still the same or does the actual mag have to be 10?Seems no one answered this. CC preemption, aside, if you were to follow the Crook County 'law' It has to be a magazine that can only hold 10 rounds, or a larger capacity mag modified to only be able to hold 10 rds. Just putting 10 rds into it is not legal. "Large-capacity magazine means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds, but shall not be construed to include the following: 1) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten rounds. 2) A 22-caliber tube ammunition feeding device." And technically, just having a non modified mag (I.E. travelling with/through) in Crook County violates their statute. Sec. 54-212. - Assault weapons, and large-capacity magazines; sale prohibited; exceptions. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, sell, offer or display for sale, give, lend, transfer ownership of, acquire, carry or possess any assault weapon or large capacity magazine in Cook County. This subsection shall not apply to ... Transportation of assault weapons or large capacity magazine if such weapons are broken down and in a nonfunctioning state and are not immediately accessible to any person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tip Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:19 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 01:19 PM · Hidden by mauserme, July 24, 2020 at 03:31 PM - No reason given Hidden by mauserme, July 24, 2020 at 03:31 PM - No reason given Deleted - accidental post ð¤·ð»ââï¸ Link to comment
mauserme Posted July 24, 2020 at 03:31 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 03:31 PM If I only have 10 rounds in a larger capacity mag is that still the same or does the actual mag have to be 10?Seems no one answered this. CC preemption, aside, if you were to follow the Crook County 'law' It has to be a magazine that can only hold 10 rounds, or a larger capacity mag modified to only be able to hold 10 rds. Just putting 10 rds into it is not legal. "Large-capacity magazine means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds , but shall not be construed to include the following: 1) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten roun ds . 2) A 22-caliber tube ammunition feeding device." And technically, just having a non modified mag (I.E. travelling with/through) in Crook County violates their statute. Sec. 54-212. - Assault weapons, and large-capacity magazines; sale prohibited; exceptions. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, sell, offer or display for sale, give, lend, transfer ownership of, acquire, carry or possess any assault weapon or large capacity magazine in Cook County. This subsection shall not apply to ... Transportation of assault weapons or large capacity magazine if such weapons are broken down and in a nonfunctioning state and are not immediately accessible to any person. It was pointed out earlier that within the city itself, and ignoring state preemption, the Chicago ordinance (15 rounds) would prevail over the County ordinance (10 rounds). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted July 24, 2020 at 04:49 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 04:49 PM And just like all the other previous threads we keep heading down the never ending rabbit hole of darkness! When starting with “setting CC preemption aside” one has answered the underlying question.With state preemption comes too the statement of No one can override said preemption.Mauserme said it best when without a test case we don’t know but we will never get a test case as it’s not illegal. One has to wonder, if someone actually had the time, what other laws are one the books which we follow as a state law and the local ordinances or codes are therein moot? I sure there are many. So with more than compelling advise, links, and history laid out.....why would anyone want to carry a G19 magazine with only 10 rounds in it anywhere? (The above an example) . If we let it get out of hand it will be only 6 rounds in any magazine, the maximum to which you can place into a revolver as only 6 in the 15 round holder. Makes no sense at all. If you bought it in Illinois and or through Illinois FFL and it came it’s a magazine of 10, 12, 15, 17, or 20 load it full and carry safely, carry on and hold your head high. It’s time that those people who carry should stop looking at the ground in shame and dropping their shoulders when walking around! We haven’t done nor are we doing anything wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted July 24, 2020 at 04:53 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 04:53 PM If I only have 10 rounds in a larger capacity mag is that still the same or does the actual mag have to be 10?Seems no one answered this. CC preemption, aside, if you were to follow the Crook County 'law' It has to be a magazine that can only hold 10 rounds, or a larger capacity mag modified to only be able to hold 10 rds. Just putting 10 rds into it is not legal. It was pointed out earlier that within the city itself, and ignoring state preemption, the Chicago ordinance (15 rounds) would prevail over the County ordinance (10 rounds). Back before legal carry when the "Chicago Limit" was 12 rounds, my Alderman (an attorney) suggested I just load 12 rounds into my 13 and 15 round magazines. Pretty silly thought even for an attorney... As Mauserme points out, the "Chicago Limit" (ignoring state preemption) is 15 rounds and supersedes any Cook County limits. As another wise member pointed out (state preemption aside), how would anyone ever know unless you are doing something stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 24, 2020 at 05:18 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 05:18 PM And just like all the other previous threads we keep heading down the never ending rabbit hole of darkness! When starting with “setting CC preemption aside” one has answered the underlying question.With state preemption comes too the statement of No one can override said preemption.Mauserme said it best when without a test case we don’t know but we will never get a test case as it’s not illegal. One has to wonder, if someone actually had the time, what other laws are one the books which we follow as a state law and the local ordinances or codes are therein moot? I sure there are many. So with more than compelling advise, links, and history laid out.....why would anyone want to carry a G19 magazine with only 10 rounds in it anywhere? (The above an example) . If we let it get out of hand it will be only 6 rounds in any magazine, the maximum to which you can place into a revolver as only 6 in the 15 round holder. Makes no sense at all. If you bought it in Illinois and or through Illinois FFL and it came it’s a magazine of 10, 12, 15, 17, or 20 load it full and carry safely, carry on and hold your head high. It’s time that those people who carry should stop looking at the ground in shame and dropping their shoulders when walking around! We haven’t done nor are we doing anything wrong! What about 8- or even 9-shot revolvers, like the Ruger SP101 or Taurus Tracker 992, respectively? Or the 10-shot GP 100? Or the Cattleman 12-Shot. That holds 12 rounds in the cylinder. Or the 18-shot, .25 ACP Pistola con Caricato? That makes it at least 18 shots as a minimum, I would think. Oops, nope, wait. The Dardick 2000 was a 20-"tround" revolver, so, any law that would allow for less than 20 rounds in a handgun, magazine or cylinder, would be prohibiting a "simple" revolver, and we all know that revolvers are protected by the Second Amendment and "non-evil Grandpa guns." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted July 24, 2020 at 05:52 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 05:52 PM ^^^^ Somehow I knew there would be the Frankenstein revolvers brought upBut as an example the normal as most people know them revolvers Getting where one can’t say a thing without being refuted Some should fact check politicians for a living, more crap there to correct And so in closing.....I see the sky as blueI see the grass as green Enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 24, 2020 at 06:04 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 06:04 PM And just like all the other previous threads we keep heading down the never ending rabbit hole of darkness! When starting with “setting CC preemption aside” one has answered the underlying question.With state preemption comes too the statement of No one can override said preemption.Mauserme said it best when without a test case we don’t know but we will never get a test case as it’s not illegal. One has to wonder, if someone actually had the time, what other laws are one the books which we follow as a state law and the local ordinances or codes are therein moot? I sure there are many. So with more than compelling advise, links, and history laid out.....why would anyone want to carry a G19 magazine with only 10 rounds in it anywhere? (The above an example) . If we let it get out of hand it will be only 6 rounds in any magazine, the maximum to which you can place into a revolver as only 6 in the 15 round holder. Makes no sense at all. If you bought it in Illinois and or through Illinois FFL and it came it’s a magazine of 10, 12, 15, 17, or 20 load it full and carry safely, carry on and hold your head high. It’s time that those people who carry should stop looking at the ground in shame and dropping their shoulders when walking around! We haven’t done nor are we doing anything wrong!Keep in mind that, with very few exceptions, preemption only applies to Illinois residents who have a carry license or, in some circumstances, a FOID card. Those ordinances can still be enforced against visitors from out of state, people illegally carrying a firearm, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted July 24, 2020 at 07:05 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 07:05 PM Those ordinances can still be enforced against visitors from out of state, people illegally carrying a firearm, etcYeah I heard that, like those people carrying these firearms at that funeral? Im sure they had not 10 rounds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybermgk Posted July 24, 2020 at 07:49 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 07:49 PM If I only have 10 rounds in a larger capacity mag is that still the same or does the actual mag have to be 10?Seems no one answered this. CC preemption, aside, if you were to follow the Crook County 'law' It has to be a magazine that can only hold 10 rounds, or a larger capacity mag modified to only be able to hold 10 rds. Just putting 10 rds into it is not legal. "Large-capacity magazine means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds , but shall not be construed to include the following: 1) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten roun ds . 2) A 22-caliber tube ammunition feeding device." And technically, just having a non modified mag (I.E. travelling with/through) in Crook County violates their statute. Sec. 54-212. - Assault weapons, and large-capacity magazines; sale prohibited; exceptions. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, sell, offer or display for sale, give, lend, transfer ownership of, acquire, carry or possess any assault weapon or large capacity magazine in Cook County. This subsection shall not apply to ... Transportation of assault weapons or large capacity magazine if such weapons are broken down and in a nonfunctioning state and are not immediately accessible to any person. It was pointed out earlier that within the city itself, and ignoring state preemption, the Chicago ordinance (15 rounds) would prevail over the County ordinance (10 rounds). Oh, I fully get that (though if he steps out of the city, say to go to o'hare to travel, he falls under Crook County). I was simply just telling him that under loading a mag, will not satisfy these stupid laws, should he want to follow it. And it isn't just 'if you do something stupid' to worry about. Even disregarding a search of your vehicle, when you have what they consider a banned mag in a case in the car, It's also a concern should you have to draw and use your weapon in Crook county. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 24, 2020 at 08:09 PM Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 08:09 PM ^^^^ Somehow I knew there would be the Frankenstein revolvers brought upBut as an example the normal as most people know them revolvers Getting where one can’t say a thing without being refutedSome should fact check politicians for a living, more crap there to correct And so in closing.....I see the sky as blueI see the grass as green Enjoy Not refuting you, but rather pointing out that "revolvers" can have a significant number of rounds, and since all gun-confiscating-minded idiots are always saying, "We don't want to take away 'Grandpa's revolver' just 'assault weapons' with more bullets than 'traditional' guns" then they need not even talk about limits that could, even theoretically, cover what a revolver could hold. It works to our advantage, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.