Assault Weapon Identification Guide As listed or described in Illinois Compiled Statutes 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9
- Thread starter CZ-75BD
- Start date
- Status
Durango_Dave
Member
There are 3 traits that define an assault rifle:
1. It has a box magazine.
2. It shoots an intermediate cartridge.
3. It is select fire.
Beyond that lawmakers try to redefine an assault weapon with superficial features.
1. It has a box magazine.
2. It shoots an intermediate cartridge.
3. It is select fire.
Beyond that lawmakers try to redefine an assault weapon with superficial features.
AlexanderA
Member
Sure. That's the original, technical definition.
But language moves on. "Assault weapon" has taken on a much broader definition, in common usage. And the gun community itself was responsible for spreading this usage. It was a marketing ploy to sell semiautomatic look-alikes.
Insisting on the original definition is pedantic and ineffective. That ship has sailed.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,212
It doesn’t sail around here, the terms use is designed to invoke fear in people that don’t know anything about firearms.
The term brings with it negative emotions, for many, that people base decisions on, I much prefer logic to be used instead. So I have AR’s, AK’s, mini’s but don’t own a single assault rifle and never have.
Alexander A is correct, fighting about definitions won't stop bans. I note that many media how say military style semi automatic rifles. Or they say AR style rifles. They picked up on the gun world complaints. Yes, the term is still used as PR by antis but that doesn't mean anything in the real battle.
There is only one operative theater now and that is Scotus. They have the ability to find bans on all semi auto guns of any configuration and mag bans, limits to be unconstitutional. Unfortunately, they can't get off the yachts and private planes to get the job done. There is reasonable evidence that the votes aren't there for a clear statement. That's why we see historical battles as Bruen was ambiguous (yet again) and Scotus plays - scolding the Circuits for years of up and down BS. Now, we get cases on domestic abusers and drug users that we are supposed to cheer with Internet WOO HOOS - We Win - on cases that have little do with pratical gun rights and might even have some merit.
Look at Minis - they haven't been banned YET because they look nice and Ruger played along way back when. However, after a massacre in Norway and Canada with them - they will be banned also - unless Scotus acts.
Clarence Thomas is looking shaky, age and behavior. He goes or Alito, Biden gets two Justices and Bruen and Heller are will be overturned. Dobbs showed the way of the Court acting on social beliefs as compared to precedent.
There is only one operative theater now and that is Scotus. They have the ability to find bans on all semi auto guns of any configuration and mag bans, limits to be unconstitutional. Unfortunately, they can't get off the yachts and private planes to get the job done. There is reasonable evidence that the votes aren't there for a clear statement. That's why we see historical battles as Bruen was ambiguous (yet again) and Scotus plays - scolding the Circuits for years of up and down BS. Now, we get cases on domestic abusers and drug users that we are supposed to cheer with Internet WOO HOOS - We Win - on cases that have little do with pratical gun rights and might even have some merit.
Look at Minis - they haven't been banned YET because they look nice and Ruger played along way back when. However, after a massacre in Norway and Canada with them - they will be banned also - unless Scotus acts.
Clarence Thomas is looking shaky, age and behavior. He goes or Alito, Biden gets two Justices and Bruen and Heller are will be overturned. Dobbs showed the way of the Court acting on social beliefs as compared to precedent.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,212
That's what will happen, the incompetent bans will be rewritten basically to take out all semi auto guns like in Australia or New Zealand. The Congress is useless legislatively to undo state bans. Some states will not have bans but even red states can fall to a moral panic with some horror show. That's why I continually rail against Scotus who either doesn't get it, play dominance games with the Circuits for childish reasons or don't have the vote.
The remands were idiotic. Having the circuits do their jobs - idiotic rationale.
The remands were idiotic. Having the circuits do their jobs - idiotic rationale.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,212
The more I think about it, I like ”black rifle” much better and if I was smart I would have already started BRM (black rifles matter) and would have vacation homes around the Country while just stirring the pot to keep the donations coming…if your against them, your a racist. That’s what they would do, if they were for them. 
illinoisburt
Member
Since this forum is legal, let's look at the law rather than opinions about the rule. The Beretta CX4 is specifically named as a prohibited assault weapon in the law.
For additional information, please refer to 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(a)(1) and the ISP’s guide.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
I have never seen any credible evidence that the gun community popularized the term “assault weapon” prior to Josh Sugarmann’s 1988 screed “Assault Weapons and Accessories in America” that the Violence Policy Center ran with, and pushed it insanely hard after the Stockton, CA schoolyard shooting in 1989, or that it was ever mainstream in the gun press as a marketing term for Title 1 semiautos. I have seen some unsupported handwaving that it was once used obscurely in Shotgun News prior to Sugarmann et al, and possibly one gun magazine cover that may or may not have been talking about Title 2 military weapons and that might have been after Sugarmann et al, but nothing more than that.
But as someone who was closely following the gun issue on Fidonet and Usenet at that time, and who subscribed to both G&A and the American Rifleman magazines starting in 1988 or 1989 and still has many of those magazines (plus a couple of ban-era issues of Shotgun News), I can tell you categorically that both the RKBA crowd and the gun press considered “assault weapon” to be a prohibitionist buzzword intended to conflate restricted Title 2 assault rifles with civilian rifles, shotguns, and handguns, and that the view was that “Assault Weapon” was used because Sugarmann et al wanted to use the issue to restrict handguns, not just rifles. The gun control lobby at the time openly acknowledged that long guns were not a crime problem, but Sugarmann’s white paper explained how the “new topic” of scary-looking rifles could be used to resurrect the push for a ban on handguns.
Of course, Sugarmann and the VPC’s efforts ultimately had the opposite effect, launching carry licensure reform/shall-issue while making the AR-15 the most popular rifle in U.S. homes, but their goal at the time was a handgun ban, and the misleading elastic term “assault weapon” was a means to that end.
I strongly disagree. Using the terminology popularized by the prohibitionists just grants them control over the language and terms of the debate. An AR-15 is a small-caliber civilian rifle, not an “assault weapon”. Period.
Having said that, I agree that going all “AKSHUALLY…” against the term “assault weapon” vs. “assault rifle” vs. “civilian Title 1 non-automatic rifle” in a debate about guns with modern styling is often going to be a distraction from addressing the argument itself. Usuallly there are far more effective approaches. But I categorically reject the idea that gun owners should accept/adopt it, because it’s ostensibly no big deal to call civilian guns/ammo “assault weapons” or “Saturday Night Specials” or “bunker busters” or “cop-killer bullets” or “antiaircraft weapons” or “automatic weapons” or what have you. The slogan “assault weapon”, as-used, is a propaganda tool of the gun control lobby, and should be viewed as such, IMNSHO.
That's all well and good but it still doesn't matter in fighting bans now. From the gun world, just search on Gun Digest Book of Assault Weapons in Amazon. Unless the gun world can come make a convincing case for why civilians can have semi auto firearms with higher capacity magazines, bans will continue. Bruen won't cut it unless Scotus actually will act on bans in the states that put them forward.
AlexanderA
Member
Let's not forget that military weapons were what the 2nd Amendment was intended to protect. The 2nd Amendment was not about hunting or other mundane uses. The idea of the 2nd was that the population was to have the means to fight against foreign or domestic tyranny.
If the Supreme Court followed this originalist interpretation, all "assault weapon" bans, and even the National Firearms Act, would be declared unconstitutional. But they don't have the guts to do so.
If the Supreme Court followed this originalist interpretation, all "assault weapon" bans, and even the National Firearms Act, would be declared unconstitutional. But they don't have the guts to do so.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,212
Let's see how just saying 2A works out. Heller was 5/4. Thus, it was not universally accepted as a law of the universe. Scotus changes, it can all change. The interpretation of the Constitution is based on the social conditions of the times and the membership of the Court. It is naive to think otherwise. Thomas can say what he wants, the majority changes and it's a different game.
Do we need to cite numerous examples of the Court going back and forth, violating human rights because of the opinions prevalent at the time of some decision?
Do we need to cite numerous examples of the Court going back and forth, violating human rights because of the opinions prevalent at the time of some decision?
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
The “Gun Digest Book of Assault Weapons” is about military Title 2 automatic weapons (with 3 military sniper rifles and a couple military/LE riot guns thrown in seemingly at random), not about Title 1 AR-15’s, civilian AKs, and whatnot, or the non-military/non-LE market at all.
As best I can tell, it came after Sugarmann’s 1988 whitepaper, and the editors were probably trying to cash in on the media buzzword, and maybe also to try to come up with a title that would kinda-sorta encompass open-bolt LMG’s and submachineguns, select-fire assault rifles, and SWAT weapons together. But it certainly does not support the use of “assault weapon” as an epithet for Title 1 civilian semiautos like the AR-15.
Tactically speaking, as long as we have a de facto ban on Title 2 automatic weapons, then prohibitionists intentionally confusing low-information voters and politicians into thinking the most popular Title 1 rifles are functionally identical to Title 2 machineguns, and different from other Title 1 rifles, is an effective tactic—no matter how wrong or dishonest that approach is. The Title 1 vs. Title 2 distinction *matters* unless and until the Title 2 restrictions are lifted, and aiding the prohibitionist zealots in that conflation does us no favors.
I don’t disagree. But in the current environment, incrementalism wins (look at carry licensure reform, which in many states has gone No-Issue Except for the Wealthy/Connected —> Shall-Issue—> Constitutional Carry).
N555
Member
Lately the trend has been to blanket ban anything with certain evil features.
Some of them so all encompassing they include things like Glocks, Ruger 10/22 and shotguns that have fixed 20'' barrel because they have a fixed 20" mag tube.
Some of them so all encompassing they include things like Glocks, Ruger 10/22 and shotguns that have fixed 20'' barrel because they have a fixed 20" mag tube.
One can easily see bans on all semi guns, handguns and long guns. Same old refrain - needed an unambiguous Scotus decision. NO semi auto firearm of any configuration, magazine of any capacity can be banned give the text of the 2nd A.
Short and sweet - no screwing with remands, rules about Humbord Dumptoot in 1791.
Short and sweet - no screwing with remands, rules about Humbord Dumptoot in 1791.
CapnMac
Member
This has been widely veering off the topic of the IL-specific definitions. The explicit list is just that, explicit. There's likely room for debate on the features list that defines all items not on the explicit list.
JTHunter
Member
The politicians have been so duplicitous and vague in the way the PICA is worded, making one simple change can change a gun's "legal" status to "illegal". For example -
A Ruger 10/22 rimfire is "legal" with the 10 shot rotary magazine, as long as it has no other "attributes" (thumbhole stock, flash suppressor, folding stock). BUT, if you put a larger magazine in that "bare minimum" 10/22, you're toast.
Another would be the Remington 870 shotgun. If "factory stock", you're OK, but put an extended magazine on it and it gets banned.
Or use those "minishells" instead of regular 2.75" or 3" shells and you can put more than 5 rounds in the standard magazine. OOPS!! Your 870 has just become a banned "assault weapon" simply by holding more ammo for the same damn gun.
I strongly urge you to go read the numerous posts at Illinois Carry (.) com and/or look up Todd Vandermyde's "Freedom Steel" videos.
A Ruger 10/22 rimfire is "legal" with the 10 shot rotary magazine, as long as it has no other "attributes" (thumbhole stock, flash suppressor, folding stock). BUT, if you put a larger magazine in that "bare minimum" 10/22, you're toast.
Another would be the Remington 870 shotgun. If "factory stock", you're OK, but put an extended magazine on it and it gets banned.
Or use those "minishells" instead of regular 2.75" or 3" shells and you can put more than 5 rounds in the standard magazine. OOPS!! Your 870 has just become a banned "assault weapon" simply by holding more ammo for the same damn gun.
I strongly urge you to go read the numerous posts at Illinois Carry (.) com and/or look up Todd Vandermyde's "Freedom Steel" videos.
lilguy
Member
For over 50 year I’ve held a Illinois gun owner license, FOID card. When I bought my first gun, a revolver, I asked why did the state develop the system? “ So they know where to start when it’s time to confiscate them” was the shops owners reply. I remember it to this day.
illinoisburt
Member
Your statements above about the 870 shotgun and Ruger 10/22 are not correct. The 870 is not a semi auto, nor does it operate with a rotating cylinder ( ie street sweeper). A standard 10/22 will not change it's status by simply changing the magazine. It would require a physical change in the rifle such as different stocks. (The magazine itself may be restricted though)
From the statute:
(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
.
lilguy
Member
Interesting, you can cut up/destroy the item and be done with it.
I visited several LGSs this week to see what's happening on the ground. They all have areas with list guns displayed with pricing but with various caveats attached to their salability.
From Cabelas to the neighborhood shop they all said the Ruger 10/22 and Standard Mini 14 are exempt from the ban for now.
The law gives the ISP the authority to modify the list as they seem necessary without getting new legislation, who knows whats coming.
Cabellas had no semiauto rifles in stock at the moment except a Ruger 10/22. Another
shop had a 10/22, 2 Mini 14s, a beautiful Browning BAR and a Henry 9mm carbine as the only SAs available for sale outside the ban. It’s interesting seeing all this kinda fall in to place.
I visited several LGSs this week to see what's happening on the ground. They all have areas with list guns displayed with pricing but with various caveats attached to their salability.
From Cabelas to the neighborhood shop they all said the Ruger 10/22 and Standard Mini 14 are exempt from the ban for now.
The law gives the ISP the authority to modify the list as they seem necessary without getting new legislation, who knows whats coming.
Cabellas had no semiauto rifles in stock at the moment except a Ruger 10/22. Another
shop had a 10/22, 2 Mini 14s, a beautiful Browning BAR and a Henry 9mm carbine as the only SAs available for sale outside the ban. It’s interesting seeing all this kinda fall in to place.
JTHunter
Member
Then you might want to look up the videos by Todd Vandermyde - "Freedom's Steel" - and double check.
Todd saying what "might be" doesn't cut it for me. 870 is not now, nor ever has been, a semi auto. I also can't find anywhere there are restrictions on magazine limits for pump, lever action firearms.
- Status
