Simple clear question on preemption on handguns magzines.

[Nakano]

So it can be made clear to anyone, does the new carry bill make handgun magazines unrestricted in Illinois as long as you have a FOID card or do you need a CCW license for them not to be regulated?

[Tvandermyde]

my belief is that both apply. If you have a FOID the regulation of handguns, and their components or ammo are an exclusive function of the state. If you have a carry license double so, especially while carrying.

[borgranta]

Non-residents are also ptotected by the preemption as long as they are not prohibited from gun ownership.

[WindyCityGuy]

So it can be made clear to anyone, does the new carry bill make handgun magazines unrestricted in Illinois as long as you have a FOID card or do you need a CCW license for them not to be regulated?

 

The new law is silent on magazines. I will bet my house that Chicago/Cook county and other towns will prosecute individuals that have magazines exceeding their maximums,

[Capt_Destro]

So it can be made clear to anyone, does the new carry bill make handgun magazines unrestricted in Illinois as long as you have a FOID card or do you need a CCW license for them not to be regulated?

 

The new law is silent on magazines. I will bet my house that Chicago/Cook county and other towns will prosecute individuals that have magazines exceeding their maximums,

 

I'm sure they don't want to be a test case and pay out another few million dollars. If they do well.. I could use the money.

[drdoom]

Um, sorry guys, a magazine is part of a handgun, heck, it's even an accessory, so yeah I should think it'd be covered.

[KarlJ]

Brandon Phelps said, during the floor debate, that the intent of the law was to exempt handgun magazines from local ordinance.

I'm sure there is some audio that could be brought back up to confirm this.

 

I don't understand why the word "magazine" wasn't included in the language of the law but I heard the bill sponsor, Brandon phelps, say that handgun magazines were exempt from ordinance.(Not it the same words).

 

So, it could end up taking a court case to clarify this?

Hope I'm wrong! My hope is that in the next legislative session they will be able to amend the law with the intended language that will exempt handgun magazines, in writing and not just with "intent". If its not in writing we just open the door for any one of our numerous anti-gun communities to try and prosecute a law abiding citizen.

 

I live in Cook. They passed a 10rnd mag. capacity limit.

I carry a Glock 23 with 13rnd magazines. That gun goes everywhere I go, legally transported of coarse. I keep a loaded magazine in a blackhawk mag. holster on my hip. I hope I don't become a test case for the confusion we have here. I can't afford to fight a court battle but I have faith in what Brandon Phelps says, so I carry 13rnd magazines.

 

Not all law enforcement knows what's what either. A friend of mine is a supervisor an my local PD. I put in a hose bib for him yesterday and of coarse we talked guns. I asked him about transporting in a center counsel and what he would do if he made a stop and came across this. He said as long as they have a FOID and the ammo/magazines were stored seperately then there would be no violation. I had to tell him he was wrong, illinois does not regulate the transport of ammo. including ammo in loaded magazines. I then showed him my printout from the ISP to back up my statement.

He's an intelligent person but he didn't know that. It goes to show the issues we could possibly run into. Get the wrong guy and were looking at an arrest, a $500 tow and a $250 impound fee. Then ya have to fight to get reimbursed and legal fees. It's not a trick bag I want to be in!

 

He said it was a good idea to carry that paperwork from the ISP and he also said that if he needs info an firearm laws in the future that I would be the guy he calls!

 

The point here is illinois needs to clean up some of the vagueness in our firearm laws and our law enforcement need some type of refresher coarse to come up to speed on illinois firearm laws

[Nakano]

So it seems like the wording dosn't say "magazine", yet they are an accessory and it was stated in the floor debate that they where indeed included as not being regulated. I can see some hesitation since it's not word for word clear (what is in this state anyhow) , but overall it's clear for those that know what a magazine is.

[defaultdotxbe]

So it seems like the wording dosn't say "magazine", yet they are an accessory and it was stated in the floor debate that they where indeed included as not being regulated. I can see some hesitation since it's not word for word clear (what is in this state anyhow) , but overall it's clear for those that know what a magazine is.

The way I see it there are several factors that will come into play in litigation, the actual wording of the law, the legislative intent, and the legal precedent

 

Personally I think the wording and precedent are against us (precedent is that magazines are regulated separately from firearms, as in every AWB ever) so I would not personally want to be a test case although that doesn't stop me from having banned magazines lol

[RockerXX]

Personally I think the wording and precedent are against us (precedent is that magazines are regulated separately from firearms, as in every AWB ever) so I would not personally want to be a test case although that doesn't stop me from having banned magazines lol

 

And legislative intent is not a strong legal crutch, it can certainly work in your favor (or against you) but only if the Judge decides to consider it at all...

 

I think some amendments (actually a big long laundry list of amendments) to the law would be very beneficial to clarifying the law and should be a high priority next session vs gambling on the courts to decide what was intended or not...

[richp]

my belief is that both apply. If you have a FOID the regulation of handguns, and their components or ammo are an exclusive function of the state. If you have a carry license double so, especially while carrying.

 

Hi,

 

I sure will be glad when the "their components" part is clarified -- not just as to magazines, but also laser sights in certain very large municipalities.

 

FWIW.

 

Rich Phillips

[lockman]

A magazine is most certainly a component. This argument seems to be similar to is a center console a container? I say asked and answered.

 

I believe that any magazine that is pistol specific is fully preempted. A multi-purpose magazine useable in pistol, rifle and/or shotgun could be an issue if attached to a rifle or shotgun, or transported independently without a nexus to a pistol. In the latter the burden of proof may shift to the defendant to prove the exemption. ( as If the burden has ever been on anyone else in this state)

[WindyCityGuy]

So it seems like the wording dosn't say "magazine", yet they are an accessory and it was stated in the floor debate that they where indeed included as not being regulated. I can see some hesitation since it's not word for word clear (what is in this state anyhow) , but overall it's clear for those that know what a magazine is.

The way I see it there are several factors that will come into play in litigation, the actual wording of the law, the legislative intent, and the legal precedent

 

Personally I think the wording and precedent are against us (precedent is that magazines are regulated separately from firearms, as in every AWB ever) so I would not personally want to be a test case although that doesn't stop me from having banned magazines lol

 

Exactly. Until the law is amended to specifically state magazines anyone who "assumes" they are covered are being foolish.

[WindyCityGuy]

A magazine is most certainly a component. This argument seems to be similar to is a center console a container? I say asked and answered.

 

I believe that any magazine that is pistol specific is fully preempted. A multi-purpose magazine useable in pistol, rifle and/or shotgun could be an issue if attached to a rifle or shotgun, or transported independently without a nexus to a pistol. In the latter the burden of proof may shift to the defendant to prove the exemption. ( as If the burden has ever been on anyone else in this state)

 

I have spoken to a large number of CPD on this specific point. They are viewing magazines as a completely separate item from a hand gun. They were VERY clear. If you are caught with a magazine that exceeds Chicago's magazine limit you will be arrested. It is FAR from "asked and answered".

[Federal Farmer]

One of the first things I did was bring my Draco 7.62x39mm pistol home with its standard 30rd magazines. When I get my AR-15 pistols built, they'll come home too.

[borgranta]

A magazine is most certainly a component. This argument seems to be similar to is a center console a container? I say asked and answered.

 

I believe that any magazine that is pistol specific is fully preempted. A multi-purpose magazine useable in pistol, rifle and/or shotgun could be an issue if attached to a rifle or shotgun, or transported independently without a nexus to a pistol. In the latter the burden of proof may shift to the defendant to prove the exemption. ( as If the burden has ever been on anyone else in this state)

The best bet is to make sure that the magazine is the same brand as the gun in order to make it easier to claim that it is part of the gun itself and therefore preempted.

[ChadN.]

A magazine is most certainly a component. This argument seems to be similar to is a center console a container? I say asked and answered.

 

I believe that any magazine that is pistol specific is fully preempted. A multi-purpose magazine useable in pistol, rifle and/or shotgun could be an issue if attached to a rifle or shotgun, or transported independently without a nexus to a pistol. In the latter the burden of proof may shift to the defendant to prove the exemption. ( as If the burden has ever been on anyone else in this state)

 

I have spoken to a large number of CPD on this specific point. They are viewing magazines as a completely separate item from a hand gun. They were VERY clear. If you are caught with a magazine that exceeds Chicago's magazine limit you will be arrested. It is FAR from "asked and answered".

 

I've gotten a sort of different response from LEOs I know. If your permit and DL checks out ok, they won't even go any further. As far as they're concerned, it's not even going on their touch report. If you're arrested with a firearm in your possession, the mag ban will be tacked on in there, and they will ensure they contact their super prior to putting this on paper so they can add their super's name on the report as CYA.

[borgranta]

A magazine is most certainly a component. This argument seems to be similar to is a center console a container? I say asked and answered.

 

I believe that any magazine that is pistol specific is fully preempted. A multi-purpose magazine useable in pistol, rifle and/or shotgun could be an issue if attached to a rifle or shotgun, or transported independently without a nexus to a pistol. In the latter the burden of proof may shift to the defendant to prove the exemption. ( as If the burden has ever been on anyone else in this state)

 

I have spoken to a large number of CPD on this specific point. They are viewing magazines as a completely separate item from a hand gun. They were VERY clear. If you are caught with a magazine that exceeds Chicago's magazine limit you will be arrested. It is FAR from "asked and answered".

You might want to contact Rep Brandon Phelps and let him know so that he can push amendments to preempt magazines.

[fugawee]

This really need to be cleared up,

and quick!

I was planning on getting a Glock 19.

From the factory it comes with a magazine that I believe

holds 15 rounds.(even if I loaded only 10,the mag holds 15)

I live in Chicago,so I would be screwed having a factory

gun right off the bat.

I dont want to jeopardize my CCL (when I do get it)

by being arrested for an illegal magazine.

[Capt_Destro]

So it seems like the wording dosn't say "magazine", yet they are an accessory and it was stated in the floor debate that they where indeed included as not being regulated. I can see some hesitation since it's not word for word clear (what is in this state anyhow) , but overall it's clear for those that know what a magazine is.

The way I see it there are several factors that will come into play in litigation, the actual wording of the law, the legislative intent, and the legal precedent

 

Personally I think the wording and precedent are against us (precedent is that magazines are regulated separately from firearms, as in every AWB ever) so I would not personally want to be a test case although that doesn't stop me from having banned magazines lol

 

Exactly. Until the law is amended to specifically state magazines anyone who "assumes" they are covered are being foolish.

 

So you talked to the department, many cops don't even know some of the laws they enforce, let alone what contradicts with local laws.

I don't assume, I know I am covered based on the language used when the bill was drafted and debated. I will gladly push the system to prove that our rights shall not be infringed. Everything regarding pistols and pistol magazines is handled on a state level. It may take up some of my time, I may suffer if falsely arrested, but in the end the money I get as compensation and the certainty my fellow gun owners will have shall make up for it.

 

@Fugawee

Get your Glock 19, if you are worried about the Chicago law it states you can't have anything over 15 rounds. What does a Glock 19 hold? 15 rounds. But based on state law you can legally have the glock 17 magazines or happy sticks to go with it until the state says otherwise.

 

As for myself I refuse to follow something that is unenforced, unconstitutional and directly conflicts with a state law. We have complete preemption. This is part of the reason we wanted pre-emption. One State, One Law. I'm going to have my G17 magazines, and G18 Happy sticks in addition to my G19 magazines and it's all left up to state legislation. If they want to treat me or other law abiding citizens as a criminal than they will have to pay out a fat check.

 

I'm also going to have my 30 round Pmags because they can't regulate squat on a local level if it deals with a pistol.

 

Any law that limits the capacity of a pistol magazine only affects non legal gun owners. It's a scare tactic they hope to use against law abiding citizens to have some form of control that they lost.

 

Don't forget the very people who are trying to ban hand gun magazines, are the same dimwits who stated the 7th's ruling does not apply to them.

 

 

Give me a break.

[defaultdotxbe]

This really need to be cleared up,

and quick!

I was planning on getting a Glock 19.

From the factory it comes with a magazine that I believe

holds 15 rounds.(even if I loaded only 10,the mag holds 15)

I live in Chicago,so I would be screwed having a factory

gun right off the bat.

I dont want to jeopardize my CCL (when I do get it)

by being arrested for an illegal magazine.

Chicago lets you have 15 rounds so you are with the G19 factory mag

 

If you are concerned about other areas in Cook county where the limit is 10 rounds you can pick up a 10 round aftermarket mag, but honestly the Cook law hasn't been enforced in years and I don't expect them to start now

[cromulent]

If weren't for these forums, I'd still think Chi mag limit was still 12. You'd have to dig deep online to find any updated info on chicago laws, and I'm guessing that's how they want it. A lot of stores still won't ship anything to Chicago based on old information

[Tvandermyde]

So it seems like the wording dosn't say "magazine", yet they are an accessory and it was stated in the floor debate that they where indeed included as not being regulated. I can see some hesitation since it's not word for word clear (what is in this state anyhow) , but overall it's clear for those that know what a magazine is.

The way I see it there are several factors that will come into play in litigation, the actual wording of the law, the legislative intent, and the legal precedent

 

Personally I think the wording and precedent are against us (precedent is that magazines are regulated separately from firearms, as in every AWB ever) so I would not personally want to be a test case although that doesn't stop me from having banned magazines lol

 

Exactly. Until the law is amended to specifically state magazines anyone who "assumes" they are covered are being foolish.

 

bite me

[Tvandermyde]

This really need to be cleared up,

and quick!

I was planning on getting a Glock 19.

From the factory it comes with a magazine that I believe

holds 15 rounds.(even if I loaded only 10,the mag holds 15)

I live in Chicago,so I would be screwed having a factory

gun right off the bat.

I dont want to jeopardize my CCL (when I do get it)

by being arrested for an illegal magazine.

 

Chicago upped their magazine limit to 15

[fugawee]

Thanks for the update folks.

I thought it was 10,

I blame brain freeze on a 64oz Mountain Dew Slurpee.

[Talonap]

This really need to be cleared up,

and quick!

I was planning on getting a Glock 19.

From the factory it comes with a magazine that I believe

holds 15 rounds.(even if I loaded only 10,the mag holds 15)

I live in Chicago,so I would be screwed having a factory

gun right off the bat.

I dont want to jeopardize my CCL (when I do get it)

by being arrested for an illegal magazine.

Chicago lets you have 15 rounds so you are with the G19 factory mag

 

If you are concerned about other areas in Cook county where the limit is 10 rounds you can pick up a 10 round aftermarket mag, but honestly the Cook law hasn't been enforced in years and I don't expect them to start now

 

Especially since the Cook County mag limits for handguns are preempted also....

[G214me]

Here is my bright idea I will be doing. I believe high caps are 100% ok. Email your state Rep. and State Sen. and ask them this question about pre emption and if high capacity mags are covered by it. they SHOULD reply , if not keep bugging them. when they email you back print the reply and carry it with you and save a copy at home for court just in case you get pinched. show the cop ( who could be just as unsure as us ) the print out and tell him/ her that this is the reply from the actual person who created / voted for / sponsored / helped pass the law on the subject and that you are trying to be FULLY compliant . any decent officer is going to be unwilling to make a bum arrest and will hopefully understand your trying to follow the rules and get a Sgt. or Supervisor involved and it will not be a bad situation. Keep in mind a reply from Brandon Phelps adds the statement " Officer , this is from the laws actual author " so maybe try him first. hope this helps.

[kk5]

This really need to be cleared up,

and quick!

I was planning on getting a Glock 19.

From the factory it comes with a magazine that I believe

holds 15 rounds.(even if I loaded only 10,the mag holds 15)

I live in Chicago,so I would be screwed having a factory

gun right off the bat.

I dont want to jeopardize my CCL (when I do get it)

by being arrested for an illegal magazine.

Chicago lets you have 15 rounds so you are with the G19 factory mag

 

If you are concerned about other areas in Cook county where the limit is 10 rounds you can pick up a 10 round aftermarket mag, but honestly the Cook law hasn't been enforced in years and I don't expect them to start now

 

Especially since the Cook County mag limits for handguns are preempted also....

Butt hurt got them

[defaultdotxbe]

Especially since the Cook County mag limits for handguns are preempted also....

Didn't stop them from clarifying the law applies to everyone without getting rid of the mag caps. Chicago just put in their "nothing in this law shall be applied in such a way that it is preempted by state law" so clearly they intend to keep their mag ban and "assault pistol" ban on the books until a court says otherwise

 

I am just not 100% convinced the courts will go our way on the mags

[BrowningHP]

 

The new law is silent on magazines. I will bet my house that Chicago/Cook county and other towns will prosecute individuals that have magazines exceeding their maximums,

 

don't they like to pass a lot of laws that they don't actually prosecute people with though? like the recent ordinances with the "disclaimer clause" at the end?