Semi-automatic rifles legal Post-Pica

[mab22]

On 9/21/2023 at 6:32 PM, Euler said:

 

Pretty much that. Every rifle has a feature that allows supporting the rifle with one's non-trigger-finger hand and not burning it. The language itself is over-broad. In addition, I think it's also worth remembering that the word "shroud" was introduced into the gun control debate by the 1994 Clinton AWB. It was never used by the pro-2A side before that and has never been precisely defined by the anti-2A side after that.


The difficulty is that LE not enforcing a law doesn't guarantee that it doesn't apply. The first enforcement point is supposed to be when owners register their firearms. If the firearm is not exempt, the police will deny the registration and seize it. But if even an owner who wants to comply with the law thinks he isn't required to register a firearm, then LE will never know. That's the functional definition of unconstitutional vagueness: people cannot comply with a law if they can't figure out when it's supposed to apply. The alternative is to chill the exercise of a right: people choose to avoid situations (rather than the government actively prohibiting them) where the law shouldn't apply, because they fear the extreme consequences of arbitrary enforcement (which is exactly why vagueness is unconstitutional).

 

Does language/ words matter?
Example, the police label these weapons as assault weapons according to the law.

In the police public documents they refer to those same weapons that they use as “modern pistols”, or rifles.

Does the difference in the wording matter?

[cybermgk]

[Yeti]

On 9/21/2023 at 2:29 PM, Upholder said:

The 10/22 takedown, in particular, has a handguard that is a separate piece from the stock that is shouldered and thus is more likely to be interpreted as included in the hand guard language than most rifles.  As much as I am not in favor of it, it appears to me to squarely fall into the language in the law as enacted.

Assuming the worst (as we must given the rabid antis and emotionally-bound hatred for inanimate objects and— by association— us) that seems to be the safest assessment.  Also, some may have “evil” threaded barrels which, as we all know, singularly account for hundreds of millions of “gun deaths” just in IL every year as probably stated by some lying IL politician (but I repeat myself) at some point.

[Yeti]

On 9/21/2023 at 8:59 PM, cybermgk said:

I don’t believe these definitions have any legal standing in IL and may not match the utter nonsense baked into the law that no one (including the authors of the language) truly understands.

[ragsbo]

On 9/21/2023 at 10:15 PM, Yeti said:

I don’t believe these definitions have any legal standing in IL and may not match the utter nonsense baked into the law that no one (including the authors of the language) truly understands.

The problem is that NO ONE KNOWS what is what, what anything means, there is no definitions that make any sense. Any true and honest judge would take one look at this pile of bovine excrement and throw it in the trash where it belongs.  But we don't seem to have any of those left anymore.

[Black Flag]

Shssssshhhhh...

[Vodoun da Vinci]

On 9/21/2023 at 2:51 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

People have to start assuming those who wrote/voted for the bill and will enforce the bill have terrible intentions, and plan accordingly.  

 

The vagueness issue is by design.  That is why ISP didn't clarify anything in their rules.  

 

 

Exactly. This is not because the people drafting this legislation are stupid - it's not vague and difficult/impossible language because they didn't understand what they were doing. This is a deliberate design to convolute ownership and possession of items that "they" don't want US to have.

 

These people are Dictators and they have plans for US that require we be disarmed. It's not an accident - people are gonna be incarcerated and their lives destroyed as the Illinois Government devolves into a repressive Autocracy.

 

VooDoo

[countyline]

On 9/21/2023 at 5:29 PM, davel501 said:

 

You got one of those car registers with the tiny little lawyers in them that won't let you break the law? 

 

No, we let the corporate lawyers decide. 

[Ranger]

It will be interesting to see how well this holds up in federal court.  I hope SCOTUS takes up one of these cases and bashes the states / state courts pretty seriously that push or upheld them.

[davel501]

On 9/22/2023 at 9:17 AM, countyline said:

 

No, we let the corporate lawyers decide. 

 

Nothing has been litigated yet. We won't know for sure what is legal or not until a few cases go through the process and a good body of precedent exists. I predict a lot of split precedents where cook and the collar counties go more strict while everyone else uses a looser interpretation. This could happen for every variant of every model that is even a little touched by this thing. 

 

[ragsbo]

On 9/22/2023 at 9:30 AM, Ranger said:

It will be interesting to see how well this holds up in federal court.  I hope SCOTUS takes up one of these cases and bashes the states / state courts pretty seriously that push or upheld them.

What the SCOTUS or someone MUST do is start holding the people who pass and sign such unconstitutional laws accountable for violating our rights. AND i mean LOCK THEM UP! If they want to arrest me  for using the wrong pronoun then they should face the same. The immunity they claim should not cover this. Time to remove that! Let them face the consequences of their actions. 

[Bubbacs]

On 9/22/2023 at 9:30 AM, Ranger said:

It will be interesting to see how well this holds up in federal court.  I hope SCOTUS takes up one of these cases and bashes the states / state courts pretty seriously that push or upheld them.

By the time it gets into Federal courts and ANY movement at all 20% of us will be dead and gone.  Then by the time it winds it's way to SCOTUS and the year to three they look at it another 20% will be gone.  And if you are left alive God Bless as you outlived their madness to possibly win.  Why am I p*****?  Well I finally got the 3 purchases I wanted in my time and now they lay around useless as a broom handle and no one can buy my broom handles!  SO I'd like to stick these very expensive handles up some Democrats nostrils before I leave. 

Edited September 22, 2023 at 06:38 PM by Bubbacs

[Vodoun da Vinci]

On 9/22/2023 at 12:52 PM, ragsbo said:

What the SCOTUS or someone MUST do is start holding the people who pass and sign such unconstitutional laws accountable for violating our rights. AND i mean LOCK THEM UP! If they want to arrest me  for using the wrong pronoun then they should face the same. The immunity they claim should not cover this. Time to remove that! Let them face the consequences of their actions. 

Exactly. These people swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies and then draft and pass legislation that is unconstitutional. They are in breach of oath and need to be removed. If I swear in court to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" and then lie I can and will likely be prosecuted and jailed for it. But our "representation" can swear an oath and bald faced lie and there are no consequences?

 

We have elected our ruling class and they are above the Constitution or prosecution it seems. The problem is that the very people who need to change the laws about prosecuting representation for lying and breach of oath are the people who are lying and breaching their oaths. I don't see a Way out of this.

 

VooDoo

[RECarry]

On 9/23/2023 at 8:15 AM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

Exactly. These people swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies and then draft and pass legislation that is unconstitutional. They are in breach of oath and need to be removed. If I swear in court to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" and then lie I can and will likely be prosecuted and jailed for it. But our "representation" can swear an oath and bald faced lie and there are no consequences?

 

We have elected our ruling class and they are above the Constitution or prosecution it seems. The problem is that the very people who need to change the laws about prosecuting representation for lying and breach of oath are the people who are lying and breaching their oaths. I don't see a Way out of this.

 

VooDoo

 

Wouldn't RICO laws apply to organized crime conspiring against individuals or classes of people? IANAL

[davel501]

The federal 1983 suit is probably the way to go here. Class action for every resident of Illinois. I think it stands a chance post-Bruen, especially the reaction bills since scotus would have the final say. 

 

You can't bring the civil rights action until everything else is settled though so it could be a while. 

[Vodoun da Vinci]

On 9/23/2023 at 8:40 PM, RECarry said:

 

Wouldn't RICO laws apply to organized crime conspiring against individuals or classes of people? IANAL

No idea but I doubt that we can find a prosecutor at the State or Federal level who with charge hundreds of Politicians (Democrats and Republicans) with operating an organized crime entity and racketeering. This is, of course, pretty much what they are doing but I am extremely skeptical that they'll ever be formally investigated or charged under and RICO Laws.

 

I don't think there is a Way out of this - I hope I'm wrong but I just don't see a viable Way of holding these people accountable for dismantling this State/Country. As I have said many times, these politicians have a Plan to liquidate the trillions of dollars possessed by the Working and Middle classes and get it into the coffers of the .01%. The Oligarchy wants all the wealth but to get it they need US disarmed and cowering, hopeless and helpless. I believe that's what all of this is about - it's all about the money and wealth being moved to the top.

 

VooDoo

[davel501]

On 9/24/2023 at 12:07 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

No idea but I doubt that we can find a prosecutor at the State or Federal level who with charge hundreds of Politicians (Democrats and Republicans) with operating an organized crime entity and racketeering. This is, of course, pretty much what they are doing but I am extremely skeptical that they'll ever be formally investigated or charged under and RICO Laws.

 

I don't think there is a Way out of this - I hope I'm wrong but I just don't see a viable Way of holding these people accountable for dismantling this State/Country. As I have said many times, these politicians have a Plan to liquidate the trillions of dollars possessed by the Working and Middle classes and get it into the coffers of the .01%. The Oligarchy wants all the wealth but to get it they need US disarmed and cowering, hopeless and helpless. I believe that's what all of this is about - it's all about the money and wealth being moved to the top.

 

VooDoo

 

You dont need a government prosecutor. 

 

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usam/legacy/2014/10/17/civrico.pdf

[Ranger]

I had someone who isn't even into guns ask me the other day about what it would take to purchase and bury some.

 

I have no doubt that this gun control activity, lax prosecution / penalties for violent criminals, and overall madness will drive otherwise law abiding people to purchase & bury firearms & ammunition who wouldn't normally even purchase guns.  Not only will it not reduce violent crime, it will create an even bigger black market.

[JTHunter]

On 9/22/2023 at 12:52 PM, ragsbo said:

What the SCOTUS or someone MUST do is start holding the people who pass and sign such unconstitutional laws accountable for violating our rights. AND i mean LOCK THEM UP! If they want to arrest me  for using the wrong pronoun then they should face the same. The immunity they claim should not cover this. Time to remove that! Let them face the consequences of their actions. 

 

Considering that they take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, perhaps they should tried for treason and treated accordingly.

[yurimodin]

On 9/22/2023 at 12:52 PM, ragsbo said:

What the SCOTUS or someone MUST do is start holding the people who pass and sign such unconstitutional laws accountable for violating our rights. AND i mean LOCK THEM UP! If they want to arrest me  for using the wrong pronoun then they should face the same. The immunity they claim should not cover this. Time to remove that! Let them face the consequences of their actions. 

sometimes you have to use the 2nd Amendment to protect the 2nd Amendment..... 

[JTHunter]

On 9/25/2023 at 1:11 PM, yurimodin said:

sometimes you have to use the 2nd Amendment to protect the 2nd Amendment..... 

 

As I am not into gunsmithing, would you care to put that into plain English so I can understand it?

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 9/25/2023 at 1:16 PM, JTHunter said:

 

As I am not into gunsmithing, would you care to put that into plain English so I can understand it?

I have a PERFECT meme to explain this but I think it's even a bit to raunchy for the back room.  (the only hurts until you pass out) 

[defaultdotxbe]

On 9/25/2023 at 1:16 PM, JTHunter said:

 

As I am not into gunsmithing, would you care to put that into plain English so I can understand it?

The presence of a third hole (for the auto sear pin) is how the ATF differentiates a semiautomatic AR-15 from an automatic M16. (so if you drill it, you don't want to tell anyone)

[JTHunter]

On 9/26/2023 at 10:27 AM, defaultdotxbe said:

The presence of a third hole (for the auto sear pin) is how the ATF differentiates a semiautomatic AR-15 from an automatic M16. (so if you drill it, you don't want to tell anyone)

 

Thanks.