Illinois bans the Ruger 10/22 (among others)

[JTHunter]

Please show me where pumps are listed. Semi-autos, street sweepers, strykers, but no pumps. I am serious. Did is miss some obscure statement. Heck, half of my high school team is shooting assault weapons if that is true.

Papa - they are specifically listed and that is because of the vagueness of this law. But, they have specifically stated that if you can put more than 5 shells in a shotgun (and with the minishells you can) that quantity makes it an "assault weapon" regardless of the mechanism.

 

[JTHunter]

Frank - I wish this WAS "speculative" but both the SA Kwame Raoul and the ISP have sent out letters to FFLs and posted corroborative statements on the ISP website that "banned" firearms bought during that week can NOT be owned or possessed and will be subject to confiscation.

 

[JTHunter]

Here it is -
https://isp.illinois.gov/Home/HB5471Faqs
Read the second item - "What does the Southern District of Illinois' Order on April 28, 2023, and the Order by the U.S. Appellate Court on May4, 2023, mean moving forward?"

If the purchase of a firearm or firearm attachment banned under PICA was initiated but not completed between the date of the Southern District of Illinois’ Order on April 28, 2023, until the stay of such Order by the U.S. Appellate Court on May 4, 2023, the delivery of such weapon would be unlawful pursuant to 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(b).


If the purchase of a firearm or firearm attachment banned under PICA was initiated and completed between the date of the Southern District of Illinois’ Order on April 28, 2023, until the stay of such Order by the U.S. Appellate Court on May 4, 2023, the possession of such weapon will be unlawful beginning January 1, 2024, pursuant to 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(c).

Persons who possess a banned firearm or firearm attachment are required to endorse an affidavit by January 1, 2024, stating that any banned firearm or firearm attachments were possessed prior to the enactment of PICA (January 10, 2023) pursuant to 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(d).

The bolded part is what they plan to use. People that bought - and took possession of - these banned items will either have to get them out of the state OR turn them over to the ISP (according to the letters sent to FFLs), apparently without compensation. And that amounts to "taking" - aka "confiscation".

 

[Armored farmer]

The more guns in common use they try to ban, the greater the likelihood the courts will set them straight. Classic overreaching, and makes their case less defensible. Greed and arrogance has consequences, even in Illinois.

Apparently you're not from Illinois

 

[lilguy]

 

[lilguy]

A shop I visited yesterday is still legally selling
guns that the purchaser ultimately will not be able to keep legally. You can’t register a gun purchased after the enactment of the law according to Illinois State police. No matter the fact that it was purchased during a stay of the law.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

A shop I visited yesterday is still legally selling
guns that the purchaser ultimately will not be able to keep legally. You can’t register a gun purchased after the enactment of the law according to Illinois State police. No matter the fact that it was purchased during a stay of the law.

Well....maybe they'll be stored at their cabin out of state. Or maybe the courts will come through for us on this one!

 

[Fido3030]

In a case called "Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban", IL-ANNOY has passed legislation that would ban the 10/22 along with many other rifles. Former NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde has a video (~15 min.) that details the inconsistencies and errors of this legislation. The video can be found on Page 6 of this thread at Illinois Carry (dot) com about 3/4 down the page.
https://illinoiscarry.com/forum/ind...-sd-ill-2023-nssf-gunmag-ban/page/6/#comments
It can also be found on Youtube at

 

[Fido3030]

In a case called "Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban", IL-ANNOY has passed legislation that would ban the 10/22 along with many other rifles. Former NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde has a video (~15 min.) that details the inconsistencies and errors of this legislation. The video can be found on Page 6 of this thread at Illinois Carry (dot) com about 3/4 down the page.
https://illinoiscarry.com/forum/ind...-sd-ill-2023-nssf-gunmag-ban/page/6/#comments
It can also be found on Youtube at

Friends, I DON’T believe the Ruger 10-22 is banned in Illinois. (I’m a new member. I think I already posted this, but in the wrong place. Sorry)

Please read the law. The first very long part is restatement of the FOID card rules, the next part is about switchblades. The material about “assault” weapons begins at (720 ILCS 5/24–1.9 new) sec 24–1.9

skip to (a) definitions

1 “Assault weapon, etc.

A A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine…IF the firearm

has one or more of the following:

i a pistol grip or thumbhole stock”

I summed up for the sake of brevity but I didn’t change the meaning. Read the law!

The key word is IF! A 10-22 without a thumbhole stock or grenade launcher etc. is LEGAL! They don’t even list threaded barrels (they do for handguns), and I can’t find an ammunition limit (there is one for fixed magazines). Many centerfires are listed by name but this post is not about AR’s etc.

If i missed something, please let me know. I’m not a lawyer.

 

[Barmcd]

The more guns in common use they try to ban, the greater the likelihood the courts will set them straight. Classic overreaching, and makes their case less defensible. Greed and arrogance has consequences, even in Illinois.

A lot of laws are passed that don’t pass constitutional muster. I hope this is one of them.

 

[GEM]

It all depends if Scotus will stop dithering, remanding, coming up with new historical rules that are ambiguous, and instead issue clear decisions that weapons bans are unconstitutional. Don't hold your breath. The votes may not be there.

 

[Fido3030]

A lot of laws are passed that don’t pass constitutional muster. I hope this is one of them.

Friend, i think pretending that 10-22’s are banned to widen the number of banned guns in common use is dangerous. The law is clear and an attorney for the other side will point that out in court, weakening our case.

 

[Fido3030]

Friend, i think pretending that 10-22’s are banned to widen the number of banned guns in common use is dangerous. The law is clear and an attorney for the other side will point that out in court, weakening our case.

Talked to a dealer today. They’re going by what State Police say—can’t blame them. Hope courts will straighten things out.

 

[berettaprofessor]

The key word is IF! A 10-22 without a thumbhole stock or grenade launcher etc. is LEGAL!

Fido3030.....but I want a thumbhole stock...enhances accuracy, does not change the nature of the weapon! And a better trigger and an enhanced mag release and a bolt-release modification. Saying a 10-22 carbine is okay but a target 10-22 isn't is just STUPID. And trying to tamp down fears by letting me have my inaccurate carbine is just smoke and mirrors. I don't live in Illinoistan, but SAF just got another donation to help keep the madness away from here.

 

[lilguy]

The standard Ruger Mini 14 and Mini 30 are just 30 Cal 10-22s. Its very unsettling not knowing for sure.

Do any of the other controls across the country ban semiautomatic target/hunting
shotguns?

 

[giggitygiggity]

The more guns in common use they try to ban, the greater the likelihood the courts will set them straight. Classic overreaching, and makes their case less defensible. Greed and arrogance has consequences, even in Illinois.

While you’re theoretically correct about common use, the last few years have shown that courts don’t care about common use. Braced pistols, guns made from 80% receivers, etc. are or were, for all intents and purposes, common use. However, the courts have upheld the ATF’s infringements against these items.

 

[rust collector]

While you’re theoretically correct about common use, the last few years have shown that courts don’t care about common use. Braced pistols, guns made from 80% receivers, etc. are or were, for all intents and purposes, common use. However, the courts have upheld the ATF’s infringements against these items.

We can argue semantics until the cows come home, but compare the numbers of ARs and 10/22s with the number of braced pistols and 80% components. Which make the better case for common use?

It seems to me that common use has been a more significant consideration post Bruen.

 

[GEM]

The more guns in common use they try to ban, the greater the likelihood the courts will set them straight.

We are still waiting for the Gods of Scotus to stop fishing and actually take decisive action. It is not clear at all if this will happen. Oh, where are the remanded cases? Yoo HOO? Bruen was not decisive in content or implementation - except in the mind of true believers.

 

[rust collector]

We are still waiting for the Gods of Scotus to stop fishing and actually take decisive action. It is not clear at all if this will happen. Oh, where are the remanded cases? Yoo HOO? Bruen was not decisive in content or implementation - except in the mind of true believers.

Do you disagree with my premise, or do you just want to reiterate once again your unhappiness at the pace of litigation? If the latter, is there something to be gained by the endless lamentation?

 

[GEM]

I disagree with your premise that Scotus will eventually solve all our problems. The motivation and the votes are not there. It funny that the legal world defends its archaic timescales and procedures.

Sort of like the endless lamentations of Scotus trying to argue that they are above politics and ethical evaluations.

 

[rust collector]

If it is important enough to change the language of my premise to suit your purpose, I must concede. You win!

 

[Golfanaticshooter]

The more guns in common use they try to ban, the greater the likelihood the courts will set them straight. Classic overreaching, and makes their case less defensible. Greed and arrogance has consequences, even in Illinois.

Well, lets hope so.

 

[lilguy]

My Illinois LGS is selling AR variants to all comers as long as the pictured accessory is purchased at the same time. Kali Key converts semi automatic fire to type of “bolt action” mag fed firearm. A work around?

Also still selling Ruger Minis and 10-22s as NOT assault weapons under the law. All other semiautomatics tagged as Law Enforcement only. interesting.

 

[vito]

I'm considering getting a lever action 357 mag carbine since it appears that such a rifle will stay legal everywhere.

 

[nugi]

What is going on right now with Illinois?