Jump to content

Illinois General Assembly 1/10/2023


mauserme

Recommended Posts

On 1/10/2023 at 10:30 AM, BeardswithoutOperators said:

Let’s see how Palmetto State Armory responds. They green lighted priority sales to Oregon in light of the rulings that were happening there

 

 

I don't expect anything from PSA. They wouldn't ship AR parts or any mags greater than 10 rounds to anyone in Cook County (or certain other counties) prior to this. Their position on Oregon actually confused and surprised me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 10:43 AM, mab22 said:

From what I read existing handgun mags over 15 rds are allowed to remain, but you just can't buy any new ones?

 

That's the way I read it too. We will have to see what the final bill looks like after passed and signed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 10:41 AM, AKS-74U said:

I got a response from Greg Cote.

 

"Hi, I have read that it might be signed into law today or tomorrow. I am not comfortable shipping when it can't get there in time. Really sorry but we are trying to prevent any legal issues."

 

 

From a business POV I don't blame the guy. However... in my mind if they could process the transaction and get it on the way before signing I don't see how it would be any different to Harmon saying that if a 4473 is in process for a banned rifle/pistol it can proceed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 10:22 AM, AlphaKoncepts aka CGS said:

I suppose my question was more like, can't amendment 1 and 2 be ignored at this point since amendment 3 is a gutt and replace?

 

Yep.  Since Amendments 1 & 2 were not adopted by the Senate, they're not even available to the House to consider.  They are completely out of the mix at this point.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:08 AM, mauserme said:

 

Yep.  Since Amendments 1 & 2 were not adopted by the Senate, they're not even available to the House to consider.  They are completely out of the mix at this point.

 

 

That's what I thought. Thank you for the clarification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 9:07 AM, AKS-74U said:

I'm sure there's a better place for this, but online retailers are already enforcing the mag ban even before it's passed into law. Greg Cote LLC will not ship rifle mags over 10 rounds or pistol mags over 15 rounds. I did email them about it. I recommend you do as well.

 

Global Ordinance is still shipping mags here.

 

 

Brownells, too. Threw in a 20 rd mag to make weight for a coupon and it wouldn’t process the order until I removed it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:44 AM, Evil Porkchop said:

I guess I don't get the scurrying around to get mags. I was prepared from this kind of stuff years ago.

So what you are saying is, to prepare for tyranny, years ago you stocked up on armor piercing ammunition and extended magazines? 

 

Surely you aren't saying you but under sized stuff incase tyranny passed and you wished to comply?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a gun is not explicitly listed on their banned list in the bill, is it able to still be legally purchased?  Same goes for existing inventory - if someone already owns a gun not on the list, do they have to register it?

 

Yesterday, Senator Harmon said a garand is not on the list, so is still legal.  Same for a 1911 pistol - not on the list, so still legal.  Is the list a be all and end all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:47 AM, GunCollector said:

If a gun is not explicitly listed on their banned list in the bill, is it able to still be legally purchased?  Same goes for existing inventory - if someone already owns a gun not on the list, do they have to register it?

 

Yesterday, Senator Harmon said a garand is not on the list, so is still legal.  Same for a 1911 pistol - not on the list, so still legal.  Is the list a be all and end all?

Don't know until the bill is signed and the ISP provide guidance ,and they can expand the list every October if they see fit. This is just the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:47 AM, GunCollector said:

If a gun is not explicitly listed on their banned list in the bill, is it able to still be legally purchased?  Same goes for existing inventory - if someone already owns a gun not on the list, do they have to register it?

 

Yesterday, Senator Harmon said a garand is not on the list, so is still legal.  Same for a 1911 pistol - not on the list, so still legal.  Is the list a be all and end all?

 

We won't know until the final bill is passed by the House or if there are any changes that the Senate then must confirm. So, right now everything is a waiting game. Any answer is speculation/based on a bill that may or may not go into law. Until the final bill is passed and we have the confirmed/passed wording of that bill all we can do is sit back and wait. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:45 AM, AlphaKoncepts aka CGS said:

So what you are saying is, to prepare for tyranny, years ago you stocked up on armor piercing ammunition and extended magazines? 

 

Surely you aren't saying you but under sized stuff incase tyranny passed and you wished to comply?

Just saying this isn't the first time the ILGA has tried to do something like this. Is it tyranny... yes, it is un-constitutional... of course it is, and will it be struck down in court.. yes it will. Not trying to argue, but I just figured most people here, or even firearms enthusiasts in general have plenty of spare mags for all their firearms, regardless of capacity. My apologies for making such assumptions. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:02 AM, guzzimike66 said:

From a business POV I don't blame the guy. However... in my mind if they could process the transaction and get it on the way before signing I don't see how it would be any different to Harmon saying that if a 4473 is in process for a banned rifle/pistol it can proceed.

As a FFL Dealer, I was advised that if you couldn't deliver by our "fearless leaders" signature, refrain from making the transaction. That's probably the position most online sellers are taking. I do believe your point is valid. I don't sell much online but if I sold big #'s like Cote & Brownells, I would be more concerned about customers refusing shipment because they don't want to violate the law. Then they're stuck with return shipping fees and credit card reimbursement fees. CC fees are the same to accept & return and cost more using them when the customer is not present. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2023 at 11:57 AM, EdDinIL said:

I know I'm guilty of off-topic posts also, but maybe at this point all the non-ILGA session stuff needs to move to another thread with the Senate and House coming into session soon.

 

You beat me to it, Ed. I am hoping the rest of this thread will remain clean for updates... perhaps to honor the good work of Mauserme and Uploader.

 

 

Cheers,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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