Why do we have FOID Cards?


PDA






shotgunjoel
January 28, 2009, 10:36 PM
Okay, I live here in Illinois, where constitutional rights like gun possession are licensed with a great little thing called a FOID (firearms Owner's IDentification) card. So to get a FOID all you have to do is send in your application saying you aren't a felon or insane, a picture, and $5 or something, and sit around and wait for your card in the mail. If you are an Illinois resident you must have a FOID to touch a gun or ammo. Gun shops won't hand you a gun without seeing your card. So I was thinking, "why do we have FOIDs?" It isn't so felons and crazy people can't buy guns, you have to pass that every time you buy a gun. So I figured they just want to give you a lot of hoops to jump through to get a gun, and then you are registered as a gun owner for a possible ban. I also thought that it could be so that they would have one more thing to charge you with if you commit a gun crime. So what are your thoughts on the reasons for FOID cards? Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do we have FOID Cards?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BridgeDr
January 28, 2009, 10:44 PM
Being an Illinois resident, I've often wondered the same thing. I think there is only 1 other state that requires FOID cards. Mainly IL as a state is anti-gun. Why don't we have CCW?

hso
January 28, 2009, 10:45 PM
I think you summed it up pretty well.

Owen Sparks
January 28, 2009, 10:56 PM
Let's swap out the word gun with another Constitutionally protected item, a Bible and see if the above post doesn't sound like something out of a comunist country. I will use Cuba.
__________________________________________________________


Okay, I live here in CUBA, where we don't have a constitution so BIBLE possession is licensed with a great little thing called a BOID (Bible Owner's IDentification) card. So to get a BOID all you have to do is send in your application saying you aren't a JEW or a CHRISTIAN , a picture, and $5 or something, and sit around and wait for your card in the mail. If you are a HAVANA resident you must have a FOID to touch a BIBLE or HYMNAL. Book stores won't hand you a BIBLE without seeing your card. So I was thinking, "why do we have BOIDs?" It isn't so COUNTER REVOLUTIONARIES and CHRISTIANS can't buy BIBLES, you have to pass that every time you buy a BIBLE. So I figured they just want to give you a lot of hoops to jump through to get a BIBLE, and then you are registered as a BIBLE owner for a possible ban. I also thought that it could be so that they would have one more thing to charge you with if you SPEAK OUT AGINST CASTRO. So what are your thoughts on the reasons for BOID cards? Thanks.

I could have substituted newspaper for gun also but as you see either way it does not sound like something that could happen in America but it has.

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS IS BREAKING THE LAW.

eventer289
January 28, 2009, 10:58 PM
Why are they necessary if you have to have a background check performed when purchasing a gun in the first place?

ThrottleJockey
January 28, 2009, 11:16 PM
That's not the only stupid thing about IL. Did you know.....in IL, a stun gun is classified as a firearm? And you have to have the FOID to posses one. My mother traveled from Indianapolis to my home in MN for Christmas this year, and wanted some sort of defensive device with her. Myself, and a homicide detective friend of hers suggested the stun gun, as a knife is just about useless. Upon further research, she was left with no means of defending herself because of this ridiculous mis-classification. How could you, the citizens of IL allow something so ridiculous to happen? I mean, if you could allow this, it's no wonder you have such trouble with actual guns.

shotgunjoel
January 28, 2009, 11:55 PM
Owen Sparks, you are a good man, at least from what I can tell.

eventer289, that's exactly what I'm wondering.

ThrottleJockey, trust me, we ("down staters") didn't LET it happen, just like we didn't LET FOIDs happen. It's this big pain in the butt called Chicago. Chicago is big enough to push the rest of the state around. Trust me, we fight, but we are too small.

Thingster
January 29, 2009, 12:03 AM
Something I've always wondered about Illinois and the FOID is this:

I live in St. Louis. If I were to walk into a gun store in Illinois, could I buy a rifle or ammunition since I do't have a FOID?

shotgunjoel
January 29, 2009, 12:07 AM
Thingster, I'm almost positive that you don't need a FOID. I think that you just need to show an out of state drivers license or such thing.

zminer
January 29, 2009, 12:17 AM
There is a similar case to this in NY. You can buy as many long guns as you want with just a regular background check, but you need a state-issued firearms license to purchase a handgun. One reason they do it appears to be so that they can apply an increased level of scrutiny to handgun owners - in order to obtain a license, you need to submit references, and in some counties you can be asked to answer questions in front of a judge. Another reason is so that the state can track which handguns belong to whom - you need to file paperwork for each handgun that you buy and sell, and keep your license up to date as to which handguns you own.

What has always bothered me is that many stores have a policy that you can't even buy handgun ammunition if you don't have a handgun license. So what is someone supposed to do if they own a pistol-caliber carbine? And what about the fact that, for example, .22LR ammunition is widely used in both long guns and handguns? It seems like a lot of hassle for not a lot of return.

shotgunjoel
January 29, 2009, 01:22 AM
Here at least the .22LR is behind the counter with all of that evil, cop killing, handgun ammo.

Sato Ord
January 29, 2009, 10:05 AM
Licensing and registartion of firearms is a great way to know where to start your search when you go to round them all up after declaring marshal law.

On a more serious note, the anti-gun idiots actually believe that registration of firearms will, somehow, prevent crimes. I guess it by FM; that's Freakin' Magic, in case you don't catch the technical jargon. It has to be magic, because it has no basis in reality.

geekWithA.45
January 29, 2009, 10:29 AM
FIDs & FOIDs originate in the 60's, in the days before NICS.

They were originally evidence that you'd passed a background check and were not prohibited from possessing arms.

Since that purpose has been rendered obsolete by NICS, we are right to suspect the motive as to why they persist.

Simply put, they are administrative obstacles to the people's exercise of their RKBA, and they persist because they serve those state's institutionalized biases.

wep45
January 29, 2009, 11:12 AM
we in illinois have FOID cards cause big brother says so:fire:

262runner
January 29, 2009, 11:33 AM
My wife has her's, she shoots too but, if your wife didn't have one and you took a dirt nap she might have a hard time selling your weapons, especially if it was to a gun store. Heck, she'd be in violation of the law by just having them in her home without a FOID card.

Duke of Doubt
January 29, 2009, 11:38 AM
The reason IL has the FOID is they can yank it at any time for any reason. Governor Blago had to surrender his FOID when he was arrested. Not charged, not convicted -- arrested. I presume IL would pull his card if he was summonsed instead of arrested. I'm guessing he doesn't have it back. Unlike a concealed firearms permit, the FOID is needed for ANY guns, anywhere. Now he can't have any.

The reason YOU have a FOID is you have not yet escaped IL.

Avoid the FOID!

Jim K
January 29, 2009, 12:19 PM
The FOID was originally supported by gun owners as an alternative to a proposal for a background check and 30-day waiting period on every gun and ammunition purchase.

Of course it, and similar laws in other states, have been superceded by the Brady Law, but states are reluctant to give up any power once they have it, even if it serves no purpose (and if it brings in revenue).

Jim

damien
January 29, 2009, 01:24 PM
even if it serves no purpose (and if it brings in revenue).


At $10 per application (for 5 years), I don't know how they make money on it. Maybe they do it, though.

I wonder how many active cards there are. il.gov gets $2 per year for each one.

taprackbang
January 29, 2009, 01:27 PM
You have FOID cards because you all voluntarily complied, and you should not have!!

TeamPrecisionIT
January 29, 2009, 01:37 PM
Yet another reason why I am so glad the states are still seperate to an extent.

Damian

TexasRifleman
January 29, 2009, 01:57 PM
So what are your thoughts on the reasons for FOID cards? Thanks.

Because you live in a repressive anti-Constitution oriented state, as evidenced by the fine Governors actions lately.

I know we try to steer clear of state bashing here but seriously, it's Illinois, what did you expect?

There is no "reason" for the FOID cards other than your statement; it's just to make one more hoop to try to deter people from exercising a right.

And the voters continue to allow it, so it must be popular.

RickW
January 29, 2009, 02:22 PM
Like others have said MOST of the state outside of Chicago is pro gun and for ccw. It all comes down to we that do not reside in "the city" don't have enough in population to give Chicago and it's ilk the boot in the a$$ it so much needs.

King Richard runs the biggest nanny "state" city in all of the union. He keeps giving away all he can to keep his throne till the point he and Blogo has bankrupted the state and city. If it weren't for the Chicago machine we would of had ccw many years ago.

Btw, the foid card is $1 a year so it can't be for the revenue.

Owen Sparks
January 29, 2009, 03:27 PM
Duke of Doubt said:
The reason IL has the FOID is they can yank it at any time for any reason. Governor Blago had to surrender his FOID when he was arrested. Not charged, not convicted -- arrested.

Can you name any other Constitutional right you must give up if you are arrested?

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS IS BREAKING THE LAW!

Templar223
January 29, 2009, 04:07 PM
The state of Illinois sucks.

How badly?

Well, besides no class III and cans, they have a unique way of defining "firearm".

Anything bigger than .177 caliber OR anything that fires a projectile over something like 600 or 750fps.

So, your pellet gun could get you a felony if it was loaded in the back seat or the ammo was handy and it was uncased.

John


Oh: It gets better.

The IL State Police are supposed to process FOID apps in less than 30 days, per statute.

The message on their answering machine as of last week or so said they were looking at a 56-day backlog and if your app hadn't been submitted for at least that long, please don't call back.

Nobody over there gets locked up...

rugerman07
January 29, 2009, 04:46 PM
Why are they necessary if you have to have a background check performed when purchasing a gun in the first place? So the Illinois State Police will know where to go to collect the guns when the Chicago politicians finally get them banned! :cuss::banghead:

PILMAN
January 29, 2009, 04:58 PM
It's because of Illinois state forcing residents to have FOID cards that my father had all his guns confiscated and became a convicted felon. He lost his FFL license too all because Illinois decided to revoke his FOID card for no reason.

rugerman07
January 29, 2009, 05:10 PM
Something I've always wondered about Illinois and the FOID is this:

I live in St. Louis. If I were to walk into a gun store in Illinois, could I buy a rifle or ammunition since I do't have a FOID? Yes, you can buy a rifle or a shotgun and you don't have the 24 hour waiting period us Illinoisans have, you can walk out with it, all you need is your Missouri drivers license. I go to gun shows in Belleville, IL., and Collinsville, IL., and we joke around with our gun buddies from Missouri, saying, ......"Boy, it must be nice to live in a free state." As far as handgun purchases I think you have to have them shipped to a Missouri FFL dealer, but I could be wrong on that. Anyone else know for sure?

For great deals on ammo, check out Ron & Jo's Firearms in Fairview Heights, IL. They put Cabelas and Bass Pro to shame!

damien
January 29, 2009, 06:14 PM
Maybe we should ask the new governor to rethink the issue... :D

shotgunjoel
January 29, 2009, 07:31 PM
damien, I don't think that PAT QUINN is going to get rid of the FOID, he relies on Chicago too.

Friendly, Don't Fire!
January 29, 2009, 07:42 PM
I can't figure it out.:confused:

RickW
January 29, 2009, 08:06 PM
Pat Quinn is just another part of the "machine". We won't benefit from him taking office.

Jeff White
January 29, 2009, 08:13 PM
It's because of Illinois state forcing residents to have FOID cards that my father had all his guns confiscated and became a convicted felon.

So which of these violations did your father commit?
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1657&ChapAct=430%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B65%2F&ChapterID=39&ChapterName=PUBLIC+SAFETY&ActName=Firearm+Owners+Identification+Card+Act.
(430 ILCS 65/14) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑14)
Sec. 14. Sentence.
(a) A violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 2, when the person's Firearm Owner's Identification Card is expired but the person is not otherwise disqualified from renewing the card, is a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (a) with respect to an expired card, a violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 2 is a Class A misdemeanor when the person does not possess a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card, but is otherwise eligible under this Act. A second or subsequent violation is a Class 4 felony.
(c) A violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 2 is a Class 3 felony when:
(1) the person's Firearm Owner's Identification Card is revoked or subject to revocation under Section 8; or
(2) the person's Firearm Owner's Identification Card is expired and not otherwise eligible for renewal under this Act; or
(3) the person does not possess a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card, and the person is not otherwise eligible under this Act.
(d) A violation of subsection (a) of Section 3 is a Class 4 felony. A third or subsequent conviction is a Class 1 felony.
(d‑5) Any person who knowingly enters false information on an application for a Firearm Owner's Identification Card, who knowingly gives a false answer to any question on the application, or who knowingly submits false evidence in connection with an application is guilty of a Class 2 felony.
(e) Except as provided by Section 6.1 of this Act, any other violation of this Act is a Class A misdemeanor.
(Source: P.A. 91‑694, eff. 4‑13‑00; 92‑414, eff. 1‑1‑02; 92‑442, eff. 8‑17‑01; 92‑651, eff. 7‑11‑02.)

It's not really possible to commit a felony violation of the FOID act inadvertently. As much as I hate the FOID card I suspect there is a bit more to the story.

For the rest of you sitting here wasting bandwidth and whining about the law, I'd like to ask why you aren't doing anything about it? You see if you actually read the law, you'll find this little gem:

(430 ILCS 65/16) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑16)
Sec. 16. When 2% of the number of registered voters in the State desire to pass upon the question of whether the General Assembly should repeal this Act regulating the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, they shall, at least 78 days before a regular election to be held throughout the State, file in the office of the State Board of Elections, a petition directed to the Board in accordance with the general election law. The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county. The petition shall request that the question "Should the General Assembly repeal the Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith,' approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" be submitted to the voters of the State at the next ensuing State‑wide election at which such question may be acted upon.
(Source: P.A. 81‑1489.)

(430 ILCS 65/16.1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑16.1)
Sec. 16.1. A petition for the submission of the proposition shall be in substantially the following form:
To the State Board of Elections
The undersigned, residents and registered voters of the State of Illinois, respectfully petition that you cause to be submitted, in the manner provided by the general election law to the voters of the State of Illinois, at the next State‑wide election, the proposition "Should the General Assembly repeal an Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith', approved August 3, 1967, as amended?"
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
Such petition shall conform to the requirements of the general election law. The Board shall certify the question to the proper election officials who shall submit the question at an election in accordance with the general election law. Upon request of any citizen for a reproduced copy of the petition and paying or tendering to the State Board of Elections the costs of making the copy, the Board shall immediately make, or cause to be made a reproduced copy of such petition. The Board shall also deliver to such person his official certification that such copy is a true copy of the original, stating the day when such original was filed in its office.
(Source: P.A. 81‑1489.)

(430 ILCS 65/16‑3) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑16.3)
Sec. 16‑3. The Secretary of State shall cause the question to be plainly printed upon separate ballots as follows:
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
Should the General Assembly repeal the Act
entitled "An Act relating to the acquisition, YES
possession and transfer of firearms and
firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty ‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
for the violation thereof and to make an
appropriation in connection therewith", NO
approved August 3, 1967, as amended?
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
(Source: P.A. 77‑1819.)

I suppose the next time I cruise through the forums I'll see a thread in activism about circulating petitions....But I won't be shocked if I don't :rolleyes: .

Prince Yamato
January 29, 2009, 08:58 PM
Wasn't the FOID process developed in response to race riots and the fear that black people were going to buy guns to use against white people? I'm pretty sure that I read something about this on THR in the past year. When were the major race riots in Chicago and when was FOID developed? That might be the correlation.

It's not just a stupid law; it's a stupid racist law.

crebralfix
January 29, 2009, 09:08 PM
Source (#1 and #2):

Andrew McClurg, David Kopel, and Brannon Denning. Gun Control & Gun Rights. New York: New York University, 2002.


You have FOIDs because:

1) Barron v. Baltimore (32 US 243 (1833))

It ruled that The Bill of Rights only restrict Federal action and do not apply to state action. This idea is central to ALL laws regarding the regulation of rights in this country. Under this ruling, only the state constitutions enumerate rights and any limitations to those rights. Therefore, if the right to keep and bear arms does not exist in a constitution, then the citizens of that state do not have that right. Any law restricting arms is valid in such a state under the system as currently implemented.

2) SCOTUS policy of "selective incorporation" into the 14th Amendment to The Constitution.

This policy focuses upon the evaluation of a right on a case by case basis. SCOTUS decides whether or not a freedom is "sufficiently fundamental" to be included under 14th Amendment protection. They are answering the question of whether or not the right should be included under due process of law to make it binding on the states.

3) Illinois State Constitution:

SECTION 22. RIGHT TO ARMS
Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Source: http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con1.htm

The state constitution states your right to arms is subject to police power.

"In 1968, Illinois enacted legislation to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the public by providing a system of identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms and firearm ammunition within the State of Illinois. The Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) Act established a practical and workable system to identify persons prohibited by Section 24-3.1 of the "Criminal Code of 1961" as amended, from acquiring or possessing firearms and firearm ammunition. The Illinois State Police was given the responsibility of administering the Act."

"There are approximately 1.2 million valid FOID card holders. Approximately 210,000-220,000 applications are processed annually by the Firearms Services Bureau. In 2002, 4,642 applications were denied and 6,926 FOID cards were revoked as a result of the extensive review process which identifies individuals whom are prohibited from possessing or acquiring firearms and firearm ammunition."

"All Illinois residents who buy or possess firearms are required by law to have a valid FOID card. FOID applications can be obtained from any firearm's dealer, law enforcement agency, or printed from the Internet. FOID cards are valid for 10 years from the date of issuance. To obtain a FOID card, complete an application and forward it along with a $10.00 fee and a photograph to the Illinois State Police, Firearm Owner's Identification Unit, Post Office Box 19233, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9233."

Source: http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/


What is the source of police power? The state. I think Presser v. Illinois applies. The following is my opinion (from an article I'm currently writing. The quoted ruling is from Kopel, et al.).

The 1833 decision in Barron v. Baltimore directly affected another SCOTUS decision in 1886 in Presser v. Illinois (116 US 252 (1886)). The central theme of the case surrounded Presser's violation of a state statute prohibiting groups of men from forming a military organization. As part of this ruling, the court ruled:

"The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow-citizens of the rights it recognizes to...the 'powers which relate to merely municipal legislation, or what was perhaps more properly called internal police,' 'not surrendered or restrained' by the constitution of the United States...."

The court blatently states that we must rely upon police protection and that The Constitution does not apply (additional case law in all 50 states precludes the states from liability in case of police failure (6)). This directly contradicts the supremacy clause in Article VI. Additionally, the court has not incorporated the second amendment into the fourteenth amendment, though it certainly had the opportunity to do so in Heller v. DC.

Unfortunately, I think the police power bit has been stretched to include licensing. Even if it applied to Illinois, Heller supports this interpretation of the RKBA under Illinois' constitution. However, the license "...must be forthcoming". However, they have also seen fit to expand this power (not a right; states don't have rights, they have powers) to include bans on weapons. Fortunately, Heller does define a limit...but ONLY at the Federal level.

Autolycus
January 29, 2009, 11:30 PM
Please post a link to the law where they make pellet guns of .177 caliber or larger firearms? I was unaware of this.

HorseSoldier
January 29, 2009, 11:36 PM
So what are your thoughts on the reasons for FOID cards?

Firearms laws outside America are very hard to figure out . . . ;)

subknave
January 29, 2009, 11:55 PM
I have a C&R FFL and close to where my mother lives in Illinois they have a gun Auction at thanksgiving every year. One year I bought some guns under my license and while visiting my mother I wanted to clean them up. I go off to Walmart. Check out the sporting goods section and pick up some Hoppes and brushes, patches etc. The checkout person tells me I cannot buy these items because I have no FOID?? No weapons no ammo just cleaning supplies.

Chicago and New York need to become their own states.

And I though the capitol of Illinois was Springfield so why is the governor always in Chicago? Shouldn't he be required to live in Springfield?

shotgunjoel
January 30, 2009, 12:38 AM
HorseSoldier, I don't even know what to say.

subknave, that's a great example of an employee that has NO idea what they are doing. Trust me, I suggest Illinois split into 2 states all the time. Mod, please don't lock the thread for this.

BridgeDr
January 30, 2009, 03:45 AM
I admit I'm out of the loop when it comes to new laws. Does anyone know if/when IL is going to start allowing CCW permits?

Also, as an Illinois resident am I allowed to have a unloaded pistol with a loaded mag. next to it under the seat of my car inside a small zippered pouch?

moooose102
January 30, 2009, 06:32 AM
because you live in a real gustoppo :evil: state! :fire: the nazi's must have moved to illinois after wwII.

sourdough44
January 30, 2009, 06:36 AM
FYI, I have bought ammo in IL without a FOID card. If you are from out of state you do not need a silly FOID card to buy ammo, just an out of state DL. That Wal-Mart clerk didn't have a clue. Just like if a non-res hunts in IL you do not need a card.

paul
January 30, 2009, 09:51 AM
The Ill State Police interpretation of the law states...


"In 1968, Illinois enacted legislation to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the public by providing a system of identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms and firearm ammunition within the State of Illinois. The Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) Act established a practical and workable system to identify persons prohibited by Section 24-3.1 of the "Criminal Code of 1961" as amended, from acquiring or possessing firearms and firearm ammunition. The Illinois State Police was given the responsibility of administering the Act."

To me this means that people NOT qualified should carry a card stating same.
I think this should be addressed by the courts.
All qualified gun owners are restricted from carrying an FOID.
p

BridgeDr
January 30, 2009, 09:53 AM
According to the wording of that paragraph, I agree PAUL. However the law reads a lot different than that.

paul
January 30, 2009, 10:05 AM
Good point, sorry...
I mistook the ISP interpretation of the law for the actual law.
Still, I can wish, can't I?:)
p

Just One Shot
January 30, 2009, 10:23 AM
Sounds like Ill. is tryng to be Cali. mid west!
:scrutiny:

ilbob
January 30, 2009, 12:13 PM
It's because of Illinois state forcing residents to have FOID cards that my father had all his guns confiscated and became a convicted felon. He lost his FFL license too all because Illinois decided to revoke his FOID card for no reason.
The ISP is known for taking action against FOID card holders that is of dubious legality, but there is usually some reason behind it.

If his FOID card was revoked, he needed to get the guns into the hands of someone who could legally own them to protect himself from legal issues while he worked out the FOID card problem.

I am suspicious that there is more to this than you are admitting.

ilbob
January 30, 2009, 12:16 PM
Also, as an Illinois resident am I allowed to have a unloaded pistol with a loaded mag. next to it under the seat of my car inside a small zippered pouch?
If the case meets the standards of both the UUW act and the wildlife code, then it is legal. That does not mean you won't be arrested and charged for it, even though every law enforcement agency in the state is well aware of the legality of such a situation. Some just do not care.

There are also a few cities (such as Chicago) that have more restrictive ordinances.

<added> and don't forget the public places restriction. you can't bring a gun to a publically owned location (or one supported by publicmoney) without written permission.

shotgunjoel
January 30, 2009, 12:57 PM
BridgeDr, it has to be in a gun case. I'm also not sure but it might have to be out of reach. I know a guy that keeps a gun like what you are asking under his seat. Honestly, put it in the console or something like that.

wep45
January 30, 2009, 06:28 PM
Does anyone know if/when IL is going to start allowing CCW permits?

right after the last ticket is sold for the ground hog day buddy holly concert:neener:

shotgunjoel
January 30, 2009, 06:45 PM
Yeah, don't expect Illinois to get CCW any time soon. Maybe Chicago would allow it when the Cubs win the World Series.

isp2605
January 30, 2009, 08:46 PM
The Ill State Police interpretation of the law states...
ISP's interpretation? Nope, it's not an interpretation, it's the statute. If you'd bothered to look up the FOID statute you would have read that what you posted is quoted from 430 ILCS 65/1. Here's the statute. Look familar?

"(430 ILCS 65/1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑1)
Sec. 1. It is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination that in order to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, it is necessary and in the public interest to provide a system of identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms, firearm ammunition, stun guns, and tasers within the State of Illinois by the establishment of a system of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards, thereby establishing a practical and workable system by which law enforcement authorities will be afforded an opportunity to identify those persons who are prohibited by Section 24‑3.1 of the "Criminal Code of 1961", as amended, from acquiring or possessing firearms and firearm ammunition and who are prohibited by this Act from acquiring stun guns and tasers. "

PILMAN
January 30, 2009, 10:47 PM
The ISP is known for taking action against FOID card holders that is of dubious legality, but there is usually some reason behind it.

If his FOID card was revoked, he needed to get the guns into the hands of someone who could legally own them to protect himself from legal issues while he worked out the FOID card problem.

I am suspicious that there is more to this than you are admitting.

Nope, that is the truth. My mother had applied for a FOID so my father could transfer the firearms to her. My dad was bipolar and the state revoked his FOID card. I am glad I left that communist crap of a state, too bad I can't change my birth certificate.

ilbob
February 1, 2009, 08:27 PM
My dad was bipolar and the state revoked his FOID card.

So your father was deteremined to be mentally unstable and the state decided to take away his guns? And this is a bad thing?

paul
February 11, 2009, 02:19 PM
isp2605,

If this statute is written as it appears to be, why has noone pointed out, to the courts, the part where the FOID is meant to identify those prohibited from possessing firearms?

Am I missing something here?
Granted, I have not read the entire statute, so it may be addressed further on...

I'm curious if this has been used as a defense...

And, yes, I'll volunteer somebody else to be the test case.;)
p

isp2605
February 11, 2009, 03:55 PM
Not sure what your question is. FOID was passed in 1968. It's intent was "identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms...". If a person isn't legally qualified to possess a FOID then they aren't legally qualified to possess firearms. The questions on the FOID application are the same as asked on the 4473.

PILMAN
February 11, 2009, 05:08 PM
So your father was deteremined to be mentally unstable and the state decided to take away his guns? And this is a bad thing?

He was fine until the state took away his guns. Since when does a state have a right to declare who's mentally qualified? What happens when the state passes religion as a mental disease?

Just because someones bipolar doesn't mean they aren't mentally qualified to own guns. Maybe they should ban prozac which does more harm to those diagnosed with mental illness.

The state doesn't care if your mentally qualified or not, it's another "segment" in the bill that gives the state more power to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens rather than going after criminals.

stonecutter2
February 11, 2009, 05:33 PM
He was fine until the state took away his guns. Since when does a state have a right to declare who's mentally qualified? What happens when the state passes religion as a mental disease?

I'm sure a doctor was involved in diagnosing your Father, which must've occurred prior to his guns being taken away. Are you saying that the state just up and decided to call him bipolar and take away his guns, just for fun? Also, if any state passes religion as a mental disease, that's the day the state will see chaos that makes the LA riots look like a week at Disney World.

Just because someones bipolar doesn't mean they aren't mentally qualified to own guns. Maybe they should ban prozac which does more harm to those diagnosed with mental illness.


Bipolar has a pretty wide spectrum of severity. I've seen some "bipolar" folks who seem mostly even keel, and occasionally get a little out of it. I've also seen some bipolar folks who have absolutely no business being anywhere near firearms, because the fact that they ran out of cream for their coffee or lost at a video game makes them explode with terrifying rage.

The state doesn't care if your mentally qualified or not, it's another "segment" in the bill that gives the state more power to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens rather than going after criminals.


The state is most concerned (I would imagine) with getting weapons out of the hands of people who probably shouldn't have them around, or even better, preventing them from getting in their hands in the first place. I hope that this was the point of the FOID hassle.

I live in Illinois, and the gun laws aren't great. I hope I don't end up on the bad side of the laws somehow, but if I do - it's likely because I should be there. If not, that's what lawyers are for, and I'd gladly pay whatever i had to in order to reinstate my ability to own guns.

commygun
February 12, 2009, 12:31 AM
My sister and brother-in-law were visiting from Illinois last December. They're working folks, gun owners but not deeply into it. My BIL was telling me about a couple of guns he'd bought at garage sales. No FOID I asked? No, he replied, no one bothers with that in private sales.

moi_self26
February 12, 2009, 12:44 AM
Forgive me if it's already been said, I didn't feel like going back three pages. But I know in MA they have both FID & LTC (I'm not sure if it's true, but I heard from an LEO that they are actually phasing out the FID, being more inclined to issue and LTC), in either case it's $100 fee for the FID/LTC. I think in MA it's purely revenue based, Taxachusetts will reach in your wallet any chance they get.

paul
February 12, 2009, 09:58 AM
isp...

I'm sure the intent of the law is as stated...
But, it seems to me that the wording is such that those prohibited are required to get an ID card.


"(430 ILCS 65/1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑1)
Sec. 1. It is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination that in order to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, it is necessary and in the public interest to provide a system of identifying persons who are not qualified to acquire or possess firearms, firearm ammunition, stun guns, and tasers within the State of Illinois by the establishment of a system of Firearm Owner's Identification Cards, thereby establishing a practical and workable system by which law enforcement authorities will be afforded an opportunity to identify those persons who are prohibited by Section 24‑3.1 of the "Criminal Code of 1961", as amended, from acquiring or possessing firearms and firearm ammunition and who are prohibited by this Act from acquiring stun guns and tasers. "

I may be way off here, but again, see above.
p

BCCL
February 12, 2009, 09:40 PM
Please post a link to the law where they make pellet guns of .177 caliber or larger firearms? I was unaware of this.

I believe it went into effect Jan. 1st 2008, they now consider any air gun over 700fps as a "firearm".

(430 ILCS 65/1.1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑1.1)

"Firearm" means any device, by whatever name known, which is designed to expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosion, expansion of gas or escape of gas; excluding, however:
(1) any pneumatic gun, spring gun, paint ball gun or

B‑B gun which either expels a single globular projectile not exceeding .18 inch in diameter and which has a maximum muzzle velocity of less than 700 feet per second or breakable paint balls containing washable marking colors;

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do we have FOID Cards?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!