Is there a legal workaround to Illinois gun registry?

[Euler]

On November 27, 2023 at 06:40 PM CST, DoYouFeelLucky said:→

So if a bolt action rifle has a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, however the pistol grip is part of the overall stock and not a detachable part like an AR, is that bolt action banned in IL? Asking because a friend asked me to go coyote hunting in IL and my main bolt gun I would take has a pistol grip as part of the stock.

As a non-resident to Illinois, you may possess many things in IL that residents are forbidden, including whole "assault weapons." Your magazine and pistol grip are safe to the degree to which a cop understands the law.

Edited November 28, 2023 at 01:18 AM by Euler

[cnwfan3]

I think the bottom line is that if you ask 100 people what is legal and what is not (including lawyers), you will get 100 different answers.  The law contradicts itself all over the place.  It's poorly written and confusing (probably intentionally).  It's going to take someone getting arrested, charged with a crime, then going to court to flush out what all these convoluted rules really mean.

[soundguy]

On 11/27/2023 at 7:47 PM, cnwfan3 said:

It's going to take someone getting arrested, charged with a crime, then going to court to flush out what all these convoluted rules really mean.

 

I don't think that's ever gonna happen except as an add on charge to some other foolish illegal act. ISP doesn't want to enforce this. How many prosecutors and sheriff departments have pledged they would not enforce it? Even Cook County Sheriffs Department has far too many other things to do. And I must ask... how many people have ever been charged under the Cook County or Chicago AWBs, which have been around for quite some time in the population center of the state.

 

There will be little to no enforcement if it remains as settled law.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

[cnwfan3]

On 11/27/2023 at 8:11 PM, soundguy said:

 

I don't think that's ever gonna happen except as an add on charge to some other foolish illegal act. ISP doesn't want to enforce this. How many prosecutors and sheriff departments have pledged they would not enforce it? Even Cook County Sheriffs Department has far too many other things to do. And I must ask... how many people have ever been charged under the Cook County or Chicago AWBs, which have been around for quite some time in the population center of the state.

 

There will be little to no enforcement if it remains as settled law.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

You're probably right.  All of the power of this law is putting fear into people about what will happen if they don't register.  By actually enforcing it, they would actually have to clarify and define the rules, and that takes away their biggest weapon of keeping the law convoluted and confusing.

Edited November 28, 2023 at 06:31 PM by cnwfan3

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

I have to repeat it again.

 

The vagueness is by design.  It is one of the ways that tyrannical regimes use to go after people that they don't like.   

 

There is no play nice nice political debate anymore.  This law was designed by people with very sinister intentions.  

 

[soundguy]

On 11/27/2023 at 11:05 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

The vagueness is by design.

 

Vague is our friend, the wiggleroom.

 

Cheers,

Tim

[RECarry]

On 11/27/2023 at 11:05 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

I have to repeat it again.

 

The vagueness is by design.  It is one of the ways that tyrannical regimes use to go after people that they don't like.   

 

There is no play nice nice political debate anymore.  This law was designed by people with very sinister intentions.  

 

 

Sinister intentions include arming the IRS and other alphabet agencies with "assault weapons".  Why would bureaucratic agencies need "weapons of war" and why wouldn't Americans need to arms themselves against such tyranny? History and tradition points to Americans resisting such tyranny in the past.

[Vodoun da Vinci]

On 11/27/2023 at 7:47 PM, cnwfan3 said:

I think the bottom line is that if you ask 100 people what is legal and what is not (including lawyers), you will get 100 different answers.  The law contradicts itself all over the place.  It's poorly written and confusing (probably intentionally).  It's going to take someone getting arrested, charged with a crime, then going to court to flush out what all these convoluted rules really mean.

 

And in the meantime, the poor schmuck that gets arrested/charged will likely incur legal fees in the tens of thousands of dollars trying to defend himself. This is my greatest fear.

 

VooDoo

[mauserme]

On 11/28/2023 at 8:49 AM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

 

And in the meantime, the poor schmuck that gets arrested/charged will likely incur legal fees in the tens of thousands of dollars trying to defend himself. This is my greatest fear.

 

VooDoo

 

That assumes there will be an enforcement mechanism which doesn't seem to exist at the moment.

 

 

 

 

[richp]

Mauser,

 

You are right as to comprehensive, widespread enforcement.

 

But on an individualized basis, getting caught in a random event (wrong place, wrong time, wrong cop, wrong prosecutor) is still likely to be a life altering experience -- both emotionally and financially.

 

 

[lilguy]

Could one destroy a unit buy cutting it up? Some one remarked elsewhere that a unit rendered permanently inoperable by definition is no longer an assault weapon, according to the law.

[mauserme]

On 11/28/2023 at 2:07 PM, richp said:

Mauser,

 

You are right as to comprehensive, widespread enforcement.

 

But on an individualized basis, getting caught in a random event (wrong place, wrong time, wrong cop, wrong prosecutor) is still likely to be a life altering experience -- both emotionally and financially.

 

 

 

Sure, that could happen.  And they still could come up with rules that include enforcement.  It's just that they haven't really given any indication of wanting to do any of that.

 

 

[Euler]

On November 28, 2023 at 07:07 PM CST, lilguy said:→

Could one destroy a unit buy cutting it up? Some one remarked elsewhere that a unit rendered permanently inoperable by definition is no longer an assault weapon, according to the law.

Sure. As long as you get rid of it, the state is happy. You could also turn it in to the police, who will happily destroy it for you, because then they can add it to the statistics of how many firearms they have seized and destroyed.

Most people are trying to figure out how to keep their stuff, though.

[Yeti]

On 11/28/2023 at 7:07 PM, lilguy said:

Could one destroy a unit buy cutting it up? Some one remarked elsewhere that a unit rendered permanently inoperable by definition is no longer an assault weapon, according to the law.

The clear-as-mud law and the guidance provided don’t really make that a certainty.  Todd V needs to register his lightsaber per state guidance (see videos) and I do not believe it functions or was ever a so-called “assault weapon”.

 

Side note:  if Todd V’s lightsaber does, in fact, function as a true Jedi weapon, I would be inclined to offer a hefty sum for it.  And then store it out of state in my “when the Empire strikes back” preps.

 

[Stratomaster18]

On 11/26/2023 at 7:12 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

 

Even with this language?

 

 

The black letter of the law states that if you possessed (past tense) items that are now banned before The Act took effect you are required to submit an affidavit. Dun't say anything about "possession" in the here and now. Says if you possessed it then you need to file an affidavit now. 

 

VooDoo

So to clarify, is storing these items out of state an option for people (ie. A storage locker)? What about having a out of state friend store them?

[Yeti]

On 11/28/2023 at 11:19 PM, Stratomaster18 said:

So to clarify, is storing these items out of state an option for people (ie. A storage locker)? What about having an out of state friend store them?

The IL government cannot dictate what happens with guns that are not within the borders of IL or where/with whom they are stored.  Do as you please.  That said, be careful as some storage units exclude firearms and/or higher value items in their contracts.

 

One gun radio show host is suggesting you find a gun store in an adjoining state and pay that gun store to “clean your guns whenever they get around to it” with no rush while this thing blows over with the legal challenges.  Interesting to see if any IN or WI or MS gun stores want to make some $ doing this.

[davel501]

On 11/28/2023 at 11:19 PM, Stratomaster18 said:

So to clarify, is storing these items out of state an option for people (ie. A storage locker)? What about having a out of state friend store them?

 

Storing with your buddy is risky. It could be seen as an illegal transfer by the ATF. That aside, what happens if your buddy dies or his daughter decides to turn in your firearms because they're evil?  Suddenly you're out $1000s and nobody is going to help you. 

[2smartby1/2]

On 11/28/2023 at 7:07 PM, lilguy said:

Could one destroy a unit buy cutting it up? Some one remarked elsewhere that a unit rendered permanently inoperable by definition is no longer an assault weapon, according to the law.

Yes, that is my understanding. 

(2) "Assault weapon" does not include:

(A) Any firearm that is an unserviceable firearm or has been made permanently inoperable.

(B) An antique firearm or a replica of an antique firearm.

(C) A firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action, unless the firearm is a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

(D) Any air rifle as defined in Section 24.8-0.1 of this Code.

(E) Any handgun, as defined under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, unless otherwise listed in this Section.

 

I'm bolding C for the same reason I'm bolding A. 

[cybermgk]

On 11/27/2023 at 8:11 PM, soundguy said:

 

I don't think that's ever gonna happen except as an add on charge to some other foolish illegal act. ISP doesn't want to enforce this. How many prosecutors and sheriff departments have pledged they would not enforce it? Even Cook County Sheriffs Department has far too many other things to do. And I must ask... how many people have ever been charged under the Cook County or Chicago AWBs, which have been around for quite some time in the population center of the state.

 

There will be little to no enforcement if it remains as settled law.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

Other than selling in state will/has stopped.

[TRQ]

For those asking about out-of-state storage, this is directly from the FAQ.

[Stratomaster18]

On 11/29/2023 at 3:34 PM, TRQ said:

For those asking about out-of-state storage, this is directly from the FAQ.

Thank you!

[Yeti]

On 11/28/2023 at 11:54 PM, davel501 said:

 

Storing with your buddy is risky. It could be seen as an illegal transfer by the ATF. That aside, what happens if your buddy dies or his daughter decides to turn in your firearms because they're evil?  Suddenly you're out $1000s and nobody is going to help you. 

Good point.  Some people have purchased cheap safes to place offsite to limit access and hide the items.  But death could cause issues.  Still hoping the need is short term and the risk is low.

[Vodoun da Vinci]

On 11/29/2023 at 3:34 PM, TRQ said:

For those asking about out-of-state storage, this is directly from the FAQ.

 

Thank You! I can't believe I missed this in my many re reads of the FAQ's.

 

VooDoo

[gtr2009]

Maybe it's too late, but doesn't this passage mean if you transfer your weapon to a legal entity (business) that you can bypass the law?  It also makes me wonder - if you already have your guns in a trust, I also do not see any express requirement that trusts register items, either, only people.

[Hatchet]

A trust does bring up a good question...

[2smartby1/2]

Just thinking out loud here.   🙃

 

Let us say that a pair of friends both own two AR's.  

They decide to split the cost of two LAW bolts. 

One of the friends installs the LAW bolts on their two AR's. 

The other friends pulls their gas tubes and re-installs their gas blocks backwards on their two AR's. 

 

Friend #1 no longer has any use for his original bolts, so he either destroys them, sends them out of state, or gives them to someone that could legally own spare bolts.....such as a person that registered their AR....or maybe someone that made their weapon single shot by some other method than LAW bolt.

 

Friend #2 no longer has any use for his gas tubes, so he either destroys them, sends them out of state, or gives them to someone that could legally own spare gas tubes.....such as a person that registered their AR....or maybe someone that made their weapon single shot by some other method than gas tube removal. 

 

 

 

[Flynn]

On 11/26/2023 at 11:35 PM, kevinmcc said:

 

(3) "Assault weapon attachment" means any device capable
of being attached to a firearm that is specifically designed
for making or converting a firearm into any of the firearms
listed in paragraph (1) of this subsection (a).

 

How is a complete lower an attachment?

You would be still required to register your "assault weapon attachment" parts, but not firearms that are not semi-automatic.
 

Remember, this information is coming from Washington Gun Law who is a lawyer.

 

The ISP FAQ ( 5 ) says it is and I would expect the police to follow that FAQ even if ultimately the courts don't...

 

https://isp.illinois.gov/Home/AssaultWeapons

[spanishjames]

On 11/30/2023 at 5:44 PM, Flynn said:

 

The ISP FAQ ( 5 ) says it is and I would expect the police to follow that FAQ even if ultimately the courts don't...

 

https://isp.illinois.gov/Home/AssaultWeapons