Illinois Parts Shipping law?

[GP100Wii]

Is there a part of PICA that governs parts shipping to IL?  Was ordering a simple trigger upgrade for a Mark IV (not PICA), and it got held up a checkout on OpticsPlanet.   Same part was fine to ship via TandemKross and Midway.

 

What Illinois legal language would apply here?

[soundguy]

Optics Planet has been notorious for not selling legal items to Illinoisans. Some MecGar dealers play the same way with legal magazines and have so for years. 
 

Cheers,

Tim

[GP100Wii]

On 8/4/2024 at 7:08 PM, soundguy said:

Optics Planet has been notorious for not selling legal items to Illinoisans. Some MecGar dealers play the same way with legal magazines and have so for years. 
 

Cheers,

Tim

so, generally, if Midway ships it no problem, it’s just optics planet being weird?

 

I consider myself pretty read up on PICA and I have no idea why a Volquartsen trigger accurizing kit would be blocked.

 

 

[DoYouFeelLucky]

The last couple of times I have swung into Brownell's in Grinnell IA there has been someone from IL buying boxfuls of parts to haul back to IL.  Heard them on the phone with their buddies back in IL clarifying what parts to buy.  Doesn't seem like those IL laws are having a significant impact?

[Euler]

If a part (other than a magazine) could be used in a semiautomatic rifle, buying and selling it is banned. Some retailers choose not to spend the effort to understand the law to figure out what they can and cannot sell to us.

Some know enough to draw the line at semiauto rifle parts. Some draw the line at all semiauto rifles. Some refuse to sell anything to Illinois residents.

[GP100Wii]

On 8/4/2024 at 8:37 PM, Euler said:

If a part (other than a magazine) could be used in a semiautomatic rifle, buying and selling it is banned. Some retailers choose not to spend the effort to understand the law to figure out what they can and cannot sell to us.

Some know enough to draw the line at semiauto rifle parts. Some draw the line at all semiauto rifles. Some refuse to sell anything to Illinois residents.

where in the law does it say this?

[Euler]

Most of the odious provisions have been discussed to death. Feel free to look yourself.

PICA

[GP100Wii]

On 8/4/2024 at 9:56 PM, Euler said:

Most of the odious provisions have been discussed to death. Feel free to look yourself.

PICA

PICA lists AR attachments and accessories, yes.   It also lists many items that are not considered banned accessories.   Your statement earlier about how a part for a semiautomatic rifle part isn’t true.   You could buy a firing pin for a 10/22 that isn’t otherwise “AR” modified.  Unless you can point me to where this isn’t true in PICA.

 

My original issue pertained to a Ruger Mark IV semi automatic 22 pistol (allowed under PICA).   Should a new trigger or magazine disconnect for this firearm be banned?  I don’t see how.

Edited August 5, 2024 at 02:09 AM by GP100Wii

[davel501]

On 8/4/2024 at 9:08 PM, GP100Wii said:

PICA lists AR attachments and accessories, yes.   It also lists many items that are not considered banned accessories.   Your statement earlier about how a part for a semiautomatic rifle part isn’t true.   You could buy a firing pin for a 10/22 that isn’t otherwise “AR” modified.  Unless you can point me to where this isn’t true in PICA.

 

My original issue pertained to a Ruger Mark IV semi automatic 22 pistol (allowed under PICA).   Should a new trigger or magazine disconnect for this firearm be banned?  I don’t see how.

 

Not all Ruger Mark IVs are allowed under pica. 

[Euler]

On August 4, 2024 at 09:08 PM CDT, GP100Wii said:→

... Should a new trigger or magazine disconnect for this firearm be banned? I don’t see how.

It doesn't matter if that particular part is banned. The fact that any part is banned causes some retailers not to sell anything into Illinois.

Edited August 5, 2024 at 02:29 AM by Euler

[GP100Wii]

Okay, but a trigger isn’t an AR accessory.  Where in PICA would, for instance a 10/22 stock trigger be banned, since a 10/22 is legal and not an AR.

[GP100Wii]

On 8/4/2024 at 10:28 PM, Euler said:

It doesn't matter if that particular part is banned. The fact that any part is banned causes some retailers not to sell anything into Illinois.
 

Yes, agreed.  I’m just trying to figure out if OpticsPlanet is being overly sensitive, or if something like a Mark IV bolt (for a particular firearm that is legal) as a part by itself is actually banned. (To the earlier poster’s point—if I order a trigger for my legal Mark IV, is that a banned part because there are some Mark IVs that could be against PICA)

Edited August 5, 2024 at 02:33 AM by GP100Wii

[ealcala31]

Optics Planet scumbagging IL Residents have gone on for years. PSA, GAG, and so many other online sellers have also screwed IL residents, yet, we still want them to "take our money." In the 1st year I conducted business, almost every GAG FFL Transfer over 10rds got their mags swiped. I told customers that for the $15-$25 higher I was, they would have gotten both mags. Didn't matter, everyone wanted to buy from GAG, it was a "cool thing." Same thing with Palmetto, they wouldn't ship anything over 10rds, sometimes take the mags, sometimes wouldn't. Guys on other forums would brag that they got their 15rd mags while others didn't. After PICA, at least they got more consistent on their policy. I had arguments with Springfield Armory and Smith & Wesson, as far as business integrity in the firearm business, I am kinda disappointed. Places like OP, SA, RRA, p!ss me off the most cause they do business here. They have lawyers, lobbyists, etc. to help their customers navigate through PICA, instead, SA won't even answer if any of their M1A models have a shroud on it. SMH...

[ealcala31]

On 8/4/2024 at 9:32 PM, GP100Wii said:

Yes, agreed.  I’m just trying to figure out if OpticsPlanet is being overly sensitive, or if something like a Mark IV bolt (for a particular firearm that is legal) as a part by itself is actually banned. (To the earlier poster’s point—if I order a trigger for my legal Mark IV, is that a banned part because there are some Mark IVs that could be against PICA)

Many online sellers are just not going to pay a lawyer for 2 weeks of PICA interpretation. If they think its banned, its banned. Irrelevant if its a Mark IV or anything else. OP sucks, they know that the part you are looking for is NOT banned, its almost like they want to punish the customers. TBH, many IL FOID Card customers did vote for anti-gun politicians in the last elections, FWIW.

[GP100Wii]

That’s my understanding

 

reading through PICA, the only “parts” I see as banned are:

 

- specific PICA accessories like suppressors, thumb hole stocks, larger capacity mags, etc

- parts that, altogether, could be assemble to make an operating firearm

- parts that can make a semi-auto shoot faster, like a binary trigger or some such.

 

 

i don’t see how a general Mark IV trigger or Mark IV firing pin would be actually banned (to own or buy) in the law just because there’s a version of a Mark IV (I.e., that you don’t possess) that isn’t PICA.

 

EDIT:  Euler: I reread some of the above posts.  To be clear, when I say “are banned” I mean are actually banned by law.  I understand that OpticsPlanet can decide to “ban” it.  But if I get it from Midway instead, is that squared with the law.  By my reading it is.

Edited August 5, 2024 at 03:06 AM by GP100Wii

[Euler]

On August 4, 2024 at 09:53 PM CDT, GP100Wii said:→

...
parts that, altogether, could be assemble to make an operating firearm
...

It's not just complete parts kits. It's any single part that could be used to make an operating firearm. Last year at this time, there were people advocating buying a bag of machine bolts and registering them each individually. Sadly, such ideas only overestimate how much storage might cost. If each person registered a few thousand parts, it wouldn't crash the registration system.

[GP100Wii]

Hmm.

 

PICA says: “Any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert a firearm into an ""assault weapon"", including any combination of parts from which an ""assault weapon"" may be readily assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.”

 

I don’t read it the way you described.  The possession of a 10/22 firing pin would be banned in your accounting, no?  In the above, PICA requires that a firearm would have to be readily assembled by a person with a set of parts.   Seems to be targeting ghost guns.   How do you arrive at your reading from the above legal language?  It literally says if those parts.  At no point in PICA is a single minor non-AR part discussed or implied.  Point to where it is?

Edited August 5, 2024 at 04:41 AM by GP100Wii

[davel501]

On 8/4/2024 at 11:16 PM, Euler said:

It's not just complete parts kits. It's any single part that could be used to make an operating firearm. Last year at this time, there were people advocating buying a bag of machine bolts and registering them each individually. Sadly, such ideas only overestimate how much storage might cost. If each person registered a few thousand parts, it wouldn't crash the registration system.

 

Nah, it's the retrieval. Huge pockets of similar items amongst otherwise evenly distributed data can still send most modern query processors to a bad place, hammering your cpu and IO. 

[Euler]

Find the video where ISP told Todd Vandermyde that he had to register his lightsaber.

[GP100Wii]

On 8/5/2024 at 1:50 AM, Euler said:

Find the video where ISP told Todd Vandermyde that he had to register his lightsaber.

Euler, you claimed that any single semi-auto part violates PICA.  I pointed out that PICA clearly states the contrary.  You responded with this.

 

?

[GP100Wii]

Anyway, I did look it up.  Two of the light saber parts were a machine gun part and a grenade launcher part.  That’s what the responding ISP lady heard.  She of course said yes because PICA holds that AR specific parts (a grenade launcher attachment especially) is right in the law.  So of course she said yes, even though his premise pointed out a case where it was absurd.

 

But that refers to a part mentioned in PICA.

 

How does that apply to a firing pin from a legal 10/22?  Or a trigger to a legal Mark IV pistol?  They literally have an ISP pdf where they show an unmodified 10/22 as not regulated by PICA.

[Vodoun da Vinci]

It doesn't matter what we/you/I think.....some retailers are simply not going to read all that crap in PICA to decide if they want to play with potential consequences. They have just decided that they don't want to play with Illinois. Isn't this the exact reason The Anti's are making everything convoluted and difficult?

 

Seems to me The Anti's have deliberately made all of this convoluted and difficult to frustrate gun owners and suppliers......it's all part of The Plan, IMO.

 

Just buy it from someone else.

 

VooDoo

[mauserme]

On 8/5/2024 at 9:23 AM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

It doesn't matter what we/you/I think.....some retailers are simply not going to read all that crap in PICA to decide if they want to play with potential consequences. They have just decided that they don't want to play with Illinois. Isn't this the exact reason The Anti's are making everything convoluted and difficult?

 

Seems to me The Anti's have deliberately made all of this convoluted and difficult to frustrate gun owners and suppliers......it's all part of The Plan, IMO.

 

Just buy it from someone else.

 

VooDoo

 

Some might call that unconstitutionally vague.

 

 

[Euler]

On August 5, 2024 at 05:51 AM CDT, GP100Wii said:→

Euler, you claimed that any single semi-auto part violates PICA. I pointed out that PICA clearly states the contrary. You responded with this.

A single part is banned if it could be used to construct a banned weapon, even if it could be used for other things.

The law is not new anymore. The discussion has already happened. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of posts here and elsewhere. Feel free to find them on your own. I'm not going to spend my time rehashing this dead horse.

[Smallbore]

I have never commented on pica's details because 1. It is to complicated, to encompassing for this old brain, and 2. my blood pressure goes up.

[mauserme]

Honestly, I think the more we try to clarify this, the more we help the anti's.

 

 

 

 

[davel501]

On 8/6/2024 at 10:33 AM, mauserme said:

Honestly, I think the more we try to clarify this, the more we help the anti's.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't understand how showcasing how unconstitutional this law is helps the anti's in any way. They go out of their way to make this law seem targeted with minimal impact and that's just not true.  I'd argue getting mad at businesses like Optics Planet that follow the letter of the law helps the anti's more than anything.

 

Let's not forget their goal is to disarm us so that we are at the mercy of their ANTIFA Black Shirt militia. The irony of the leftist branding being against what they are is typical of leftist propaganda. They are running straight from the Hitler/Mussolini playbook.

[mauserme]

If the pro-2A community starts saying the law means exactly "this", even if the "this" is not correct, they get greater voluntary compliance with a law they can't enforce.  We shouldn't go out of our way to make it anything other than unconstitutionally vague.

 

 

 

 

 

[davel501]

On 8/6/2024 at 10:58 AM, mauserme said:

If the pro-2A community starts saying the law means exactly "this", even if the "this" is not correct, they get greater voluntary compliance with a law they can't enforce.  We shouldn't go out of our way to make it anything other than unconstitutionally vague.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The law isn't vague though. It's as specific as it is broad. The leftists, knowing most people are too lazy to go read the law themselves, claim it doesn't say what it does. 

 

The law is very clear on the points in this thread. The trigger in question is an "assault weapon" attachment unless it is attached to a Ruger Mark IV that does not have a threaded barrel. If a local prosecutor wanted to charge someone for receiving said trigger in the mail they could. The leftists eventually lose in court, but they will bleed you of thousands of dollars in legal fees. That's why the eventual conclusion of all the threads on this was that everyone has to make their own decisions based on their own situations.

[mauserme]

On 8/6/2024 at 11:18 AM, davel501 said:

 

... The leftists eventually lose in court, but they will bleed you of thousands of dollars in legal fees. ...

 

We should stop doing that, too.