Jump to content

ASSAULT WEAPON BAN ILLINOIS


Retired1
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://capitolfax.com/2022/07/12/question-of-the-day-3459/

 

https://ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=110&GA=102&DocTypeId=HB&DocNum=5522&GAID=16&LegID=140047&SpecSess=&Session=

 

https://ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocTypeID=HB&DocNum=5522&GAID=16&SessionID=110&LegID=140047

 

Amends the Criminal Code of 2012. Makes it unlawful to deliver, sell, or purchase or cause to be delivered, sold, or purchased or cause to be possessed by another, an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge. Makes it unlawful for any person to knowingly possess an assault weapon, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge 300 days after the effective date of the amendatory Act, except possession of weapons registered with the Illinois State Police in the time provided. Provides exemptions and penalties. Prohibits delivery, sale, purchase or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Provides exemptions and penalties.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So cute of them. Even if it passes and survives lawsuits (it won’t post-Bruen), thr compliance rate will be next to nothing.

 

Anyone that doesn’t comply is a criminal 

 

That’s the point and what they want: their political opposition (any gun owner who doesn’t do what they say) deemed a criminal purely just so they “feel good” and have the means to target them.

Edited by steveTA84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2022 at 11:16 AM, steveTA84 said:

So cute of them. Even if it passes and survives lawsuits (it won’t post-Bruen), thr compliance rate will be next to nothing.

 

Anyone that doesn’t comply is a criminal 

 

That’s the point and what they want: their political opposition (any gun owner who doesn’t do what they say) deemed a criminal purely just so they “feel good” and have the means to target them.

 

 

Also, if their law gets struck down, how many people would not have what they targeted and possibly have lost interest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2022 at 11:16 AM, steveTA84 said:

So cute of them. Even if it passes and survives lawsuits (it won’t post-Bruen), thr compliance rate will be next to nothing.

Here’s what I’m worried about if non compliant.  Are you going to take your rifle to the range?  Or anywhere?

 

if so, a traffic stop in IL could end up very costly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2022 at 7:18 PM, steveTA84 said:

Sure, just not in IL

Let me understand this.  So you are driving out of IL and on your way out you get stopped for a traffic violation.  The cop also wants to inspect your vehicle.  And he finds a rifle case that he wants opened.  Let’s say he does open it and finds AR 15.  You are going to be taken to jail and charged with a felony, no?  I understand the risk of this is slim as I’ve never had my vehicle searched, however, I won’t be able to hide nervousness if I knew I could be imprisoned for having an unregistered rifle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2022 at 6:54 PM, vk60187 said:

Here’s what I’m worried about if non compliant.  Are you going to take your rifle to the range?  Or anywhere?

 

if so, a traffic stop in IL could end up very costly. 

 

There is no reason a cop should be searching your vehicle for a firearm or magazines during a routine traffic stop, and then we have to also consider officer discretion, outside of Chicagoland how many cops are going to enforce any ban enacted if you are just minding your own business?  We have historical references in states that have banned magazines and guns with no grandfathering, it appears enforcement is minimal as is compliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In New York,

 

"... Ulster County Sheriff Paul VanBlarcum has been a vocal critic of the law; he said he believed large numbers of Ulster County gun owners had chosen to ignore the registration requirement.

 

“We’re a rural county with a lot of gun enthusiasts,” said VanBlarcum. “So [463] sounds like a very low number.”

 

VanBlarcum said he had advised deputies to use their discretion when it came to making arrests for SAFE Act violations like unregistered assault weapons and he had no plans to undertake proactive enforcement measures.

 

“We are not actively out looking to enforce any aspect of the SAFE Act,” said VanBlarcum."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2022 at 7:48 PM, Flynn said:

 

There is no reason a cop should be searching your vehicle for a firearm or magazines during a routine traffic stop, and then we have to also consider officer discretion, outside of Chicagoland how many cops are going to enforce any ban enacted if you are just minding your own business?  We have historical references in states that have banned magazines and guns with no grandfathering, it appears enforcement is minimal as is compliance.

This

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2022 at 7:05 AM, RECarry said:

To quote the left and their respect for the rule of law: RESIST

I hear you, but there is an obvious advantage for the left.  How many of them were seriously prosecuted for looting or for burning police buildings during BLM riiots (excuse me, “largely peaceful” protests)?  Compare this with Jan 6 and the double standards become as clear as night and day.

‘Also, I have a strong feeling that the police will treat non-complaint AR owners like they are domestic terrorists even as gang bangers will be managed by Kimmy Fox’s “catch and release” program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2022 at 7:34 AM, vk60187 said:

 

‘Also, I have a strong feeling that the police will treat non-complaint AR owners like they are domestic terrorists even as gang bangers will be managed by Kimmy Fox’s “catch and release” program.

I have a strong feeling that the police will treat fellow gun owners like fellow gun owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2022 at 8:14 AM, Black Flag said:

I have a strong feeling that the police will treat fellow gun owners like fellow gun owners.

I believed that a few years ago, but the last few years have shown that our police officers will be 'just following orders'. We've seen them follow orders time and time again.

 

"Let the city burn"... okay

"Arrest people without masks"... I have a job to do

"Secure the hallway and make contact with the shooter'... the chief said not to go in

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2022 at 7:34 AM, vk60187 said:

I hear you, but there is an obvious advantage for the left.  How many of them were seriously prosecuted for looting or for burning police buildings during BLM riiots (excuse me, “largely peaceful” protests)?  Compare this with Jan 6 and the double standards become as clear as night and day.

‘Also, I have a strong feeling that the police will treat non-complaint AR owners like they are domestic terrorists even as gang bangers will be managed by Kimmy Fox’s “catch and release” program.

 

Agreed. I was too subtle pointing out that double standard. For leftist sociopaths, the ends always justify the means - which justifies owning firearms that utilize mags with sufficient capacity to handle a mob of irrational raging attackers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember talking to a friend who was a former welfare fraud investigator/officer, and former Air Force.  This has been a few years back but he even made the point if they did mag restrictions, that when he was in the Air Force they just taped the magazines together.  In other words the mag restrictions seemed pretty pointless.  And let’s be real about it.  You’ve got states around Illinois if someone really were going to do a shooting, they’d probably just go buy the mags they wanted in those states and bring them back, or I’m sure people figured out ways long ago to modify them.  Just seems to me mag restrictions are pointless.  There would be no possible way to police it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think criminalizing large numbers of non-violent people would present problems similar to those outlined here, but on a larger scale: 

 

Joint Public Defender Statement on U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

June 23, 2022
 

(New York, NY) – Black Attorneys of Legal Aid, The Bronx Defenders, Brooklyn Defender Services, Monroe County Public Defender, Ontario County Conflict Defender’s Office, Ontario County Public Defender, Oneida County Public Defender, Wayne County Public Defender, and St. Lawrence County Public Defender released the following statement in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in NYSRPA v. Bruen:

 

“New York enacted its firearm licensing requirement in the early 20th century to prevent immigrants and people of color from possessing guns. Since its enactment, the law has justified discriminatory policing and criminalization of Black and brown people living in urban low-income communities. As public defenders, we represent too many people of color who face years in prison not for shooting, but for simply possessing an unlicensed gun — something that is legal in close to half of the country. New Yorkers prosecuted for simple gun possession are branded “criminals” and “violent felons” for life, facing mandatory prison sentences, separation from their communities and families, and an inability to maintain stable employment and housing. That is why we and other public defenders across the state filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to put an end to New York’s discriminatory gun licensing scheme. Today’s ruling strikes down the carry provision of the law; however, it fails to address the discriminatory nature of the underlying gun licensing scheme and the criminalization of Black and brown New Yorkers.

 

We share in the collective horror at the recent tragedies in Buffalo, Uvalde, and Tulsa and the deep concerns about gun violence. And we acknowledge the overdue need to seriously address gun violence in this country.  We are also concerned about the violence perpetuated against Black and brown people in urban areas of New York State who are criminalized and incarcerated for unlicensed gun possession while unlicensed gun possession in white rural communities frequently goes unaddressed. 

 

The people we represent, whose stories we told in our brief, did not hurt anyone. Like all gun owners, they had many different reasons to own a gun. Some had traveled from places where unlicensed gun possession is common and legal. Some had survived gun violence themselves and had a gun to protect themselves and their families. Some live in communities where they do not trust and cannot rely on the police. And yet, the police have unfettered discretion in deciding who can get a license and protect themselves. 

Over 90% of the people prosecuted for unlicensed gun possession in New York City are Black and brown. These are the people impacted by New York’s discriminatory gun licensing scheme, which has fueled the criminalization and incarceration of young New Yorkers of color. As the last two years have shown us, even short periods in New York City jails can be a death sentence.  

 

Gun regulation need not mean funneling low-income Black and brown people into the criminal legal system.  Today, we call on the legislature to design new gun regulations that are rooted in equity, not racism and to address the mass criminalization and incarceration of people of color for unlicensed gun possession. We look forward to working with the legislature to chart a new course in addressing gun violence – one that does not perpetuate racial discrimination and harm.”

 

###

News & Med
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did I read in this garbage that pistols over 50 oz are banned? That would mean a Desert Eagle is an assault weapon, probably doubly so if it's in .50 AE right? 

 

I don't have any guns but if I did, I would be super cautious about taking them to the range or out of the house or even carrying a pistol anymore. It pretty much sounds like most modern firearms are assault weapons under this. No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2022 at 1:46 PM, jeffro62275 said:

I just weighed my EDC stainless Officers' Model fully loaded with 7 + 1 and it tipped the scale at 42 oz.  That's getting a little too close for comfort.

But the proposed law is unloaded, not that I agree with it.

 

(iii) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or 
    more when the pistol is unloaded.
     

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might look into some of the smaller 9mm pistols like the gx4, p365 or hellcat.  I think those weight in the 20oz+ range but still give you a decent amount of 9mm.  If you are using hornady defense/or critical duty that should be decent anyway.  Though I wouldn't mind having an old stainless steel 357 revolver like dad used to own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...