Illinois Gun Registry Solution

TomJ

TomJ

Contributing Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
2,944
Location
SE Wisconsin
Attached is a video for a solution for the Illinois gun registry as well as other states with similar restrictions. If you choose to go this route make sure to watch the entire video as there are things you need to do to be legal. Law Weapons had their attorneys review this to confirm it was legal, but if I still lived there and was going to do this I'd run it past my attorney as well. Mods, if this isn't in the correct forum please move it to the correct one.

www.youtube.com

Is There a Legal Workaround to Illinois' Gun Registry?

Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, and Rob Bevis of Law Weapons in Naperville, Illinois discuss a possible and very legal workaround to Illinois' as...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
So, the "workaround" is a vented bolt that doesn't cycle from the gas coming out of the gas tube. Accordingly, that makes the gun no longer "semiautomatic" and therefore not covered by the Illinois AWB. Or so the theory goes.

This is temporary at best, until (a) the law is amended to close the loophole, or (b) the courts rule that it's a sham. The antigunners are not stupid.

At least for now, the Illinois law is allowing grandfathering (by registering the weapon). That's better than the proposed AWB in Virginia, from 3-4 years ago, that would have had no grandfathering. I was thinking seriously of storing my guns in neighboring West Virginia if the law had passed.

If they are offering grandfathering (by registration), take advantage of it. If later they proceed to confiscation of the grandfathered guns, then you move them out of state. And a Supreme Court decision may make all this moot.

I'm old enough to remember the MG amnesty under the Gun Control Act of 1968. I knew people then that had unregistered bring-back machine guns. Some registered them under the amnesty, but others refused to do so, convinced that this was a prelude to confiscation. Well, we know how that turned out. The amnesty-registered MG's are now worth a fortune, while the unregistered ones are both worthless, and felonies.
 
This guy is doing what he can to help and I appreciate that. I don't see the point in a single shot AR but it's a temporary solution for being able to keep your property. We're all hoping this law gets dropped down the memory hole quickly but as with everything in Illinois- it's a major struggle.
 
Let's think about this some more. If installing a vented bolt (and, presumably, disposing of the regular bolt) turns the gun into a manually operated non-semiautomatic, then removing the bolt entirely goes one better -- turning the gun into an inoperable dummy. According to the rationale explained in the OP, this would be even more "not an AW."

But in either case, dropping a regular bolt into the gun -- which could be done in a matter of seconds -- would instantly restore it to AW status. That's why the courts won't buy these "workarounds." Don't waste your time or money.
 
Sure glad I don't reside up north (particularly in Illinois and similar places...). That said, believe I'd let someone else be the one to try this "solution" instead of me... The very real attorney's fees and other costs - after a run-in with authorities enforcing this law is likely to be expensive, time consuming, etc. From what I learned in law enforcement all those years ago, I vowed to keep out of any courtrooms for the rest of my life - if at all possible.
 
This is a good discussion, so I'd like to keep it on track. So everyone please remember that this is Legal, with all of its attendant guidelines.
 
AlexanderA said:
Let's think about this some more. If installing a vented bolt (and, presumably, disposing of the regular bolt) turns the gun into a manually operated non-semiautomatic, then removing the bolt entirely goes one better -- turning the gun into an inoperable dummy. According to the rationale explained in the OP, this would be even more "not an AW."

But in either case, dropping a regular bolt into the gun -- which could be done in a matter of seconds -- would instantly restore it to AW status. That's why the courts won't buy these "workarounds." Don't waste your time or money.
Click to expand...

There are no good solutions here, as Illinois is a corrupt state which refuses to prosecute a significant percentage of violent offenders while doing everything they can to do away with the 2A rights of law abiding people. When I lived in the Chicago area I bought many guns from Law Weapons, and they're a well run, family owned business. Rob, the owner has a good head on his shoulders and as stated in the video had his attorneys make sure this conversion was legal under the current law before spending the time and money on this bolt. As I mentioned in my original post I would get a second opinion from my attorneys if I were to go this route. Is it possible that the state amends the law to make this bolt illegal? Absolutely, and we'll see what if anything they do. It's also possible that a corrupt judge does legal gymnastics to rule that this bolt violates the law. Whatever happens Rob has been doing whatever he can to preserve 2A rights for people in Illinois when he could easily move his business to Indiana or Wisconsin and not have to deal with this nonsense, and I commend him for it.

The difference between simply removing the bolt and installing the one from Law Weapons is that their bolt allows you to continue to shoot your AR where removing the bolt relegates your AR to something useless sitting in your gun safe. Is there a difference under the current law between converting your AR to where it's legal and simply removing the bolt and claiming that makes it legal? I don't know that this has been tested.
 
TomJ said:
The difference between simply removing the bolt and installing the one from Law Weapons is that their bolt allows you to continue to shoot your AR where removing the bolt relegates your AR to something useless sitting in your gun safe. Is there a difference under the current law between converting your AR to where it's legal and simply removing the bolt and claiming that makes it legal? I don't know that this has been tested.
Click to expand...
The reality is that the regular bolts would not be destroyed, just hidden. We all know this -- and also the antigunners, the Illinois authorities, and the judges all know this. That's why this scheme is bound to fail.
 
AlexanderA said:
The reality is that the regular bolts would not be destroyed, just hidden. We all know this -- and also the antigunners, the Illinois authorities, and the judges all know this. That's why this scheme is bound to fail.
Click to expand...

Some people may. I don't know that there's a law that's passed that some people don't ignore, so if the standard we use is only passing laws that no one will disregard we don't need to bother passing any laws. I also don't know that I'd call this a scheme. It's someone looking at the language of the law and coming up with a solution that per their attorneys is legal. Not only are they not hiding what they're doing as schemers tend to do, they're making it as public as possible.
 
it may well turnout that the workaround is legal, however, you will not avoid the ride in the meantime.
 
I can flip the gas block around and trash the gas tube and achieve a single shot status. They are not banning AR uppers, they are banning the lowers.
I’m waiting for someone to produce a lower with a closed mag well that will accept proprietary en block 10 round clips ala Garand, or a fixed magazine ala Mauser. Legal, and able to maintain all the flexibility of a standard AR.
 
tarosean said:
Thinking out loud.
why wouldn't someone wouldn't just remove the carrier key instead of purchasing a bolt that vents?
Click to expand...

The charging handle connects to the carrier gas key.

I think removing the gas tube would work. You would need to block the barrel gas port so it doesn't blast you in the face though.
 
Going back to the banned list, there's probably not a workaround for any of he "named" weapons.
The question of whether "parts" that "can be assembled" into an "illegal condition" is not well defined in the law as it stands.
I know there are those who are of the opinion that the ISP registry would require registering "parts"--I have not read that as either being confirmed or denied under the letter of the law.
I am unwilling, as a non-resident, to try and traverse the ISP Registry online to see what that interface requires (which could well be outside the law, as web site builders build what they are paid to do).
 
An AR upper and an AR lower will always be what they were no matter what parts you sub in. I’m not a lawyer and am not dumb enough to think I can out argue the Prickster pricks they have working with ISP to screw us over.
I don’t see a work around.
 
PapaG said:
An AR upper and an AR lower will always be what they were no matter what parts you sub in. I’m not a lawyer and am not dumb enough to think I can out argue the Prickster pricks they have working with ISP to screw us over.
I don’t see a work around.
Click to expand...
+1. This is a fun academic exercise and all concerned in contriving of this proposed solution no doubt are creative and well-intended; but I fail to see how this bolt swap in any way changes the over-arching fact that the weapon remains an AR pattern weapon regulated by PICA in Illinois. If the law provided that such a parts swap gave exemption to a particular weapon that would change things, but it doesn't. Hopefully the SCOTUS will ultimately provide relief from this law altogether on constitutional grounds but for now I wouldn't bet on this in lieu of either registering the weapon or lawfully locating it outside of the state prior to the deadline.
 
Last edited:
It would be no different than putting a Lyman Super Targetspot on it and calling it a bench rest gun.
Or a sticker that says, “anti-assault weapon”.
We are spitting into the wind, guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Canada - Martin targets gun registry
Replies
2
Views
368
SDC
S
C
  • Locked
Canada: "Reports offer fix for bloated gun registry"
Replies
1
Views
696
Delmar
D
W
  • Locked
Gun-laundering registry a farce: One billion dollars a big investment for national ..
Replies
1
Views
491
Standing Wolf
S
S
  • Locked
Air guns in Illinois
Replies
21
Views
6K
eastwood44mag
E
C
  • Locked
Concealed Carry Law in Illinois Challenged - National Implications?
Replies
6
Views
1K
pdsmith505
pdsmith505
Back
Top