Illinois Supreme Court to Release Opinion on Legal Gun Containers (People v Diggins)

[Phatty]

On Thursday, October 8, the Illinois Supreme Court will release its opinion in People v. Diggens. At issue is whether a center console in a car qualifies as a "case, firearm carrying box, shipping box or other container" under section 24-1.9 of the Illinois Criminal Code.

Here is a link to the appellate court decision:

http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/appellatecourt/2008/3rddistrict/march/3070016.pdf

 

[flying_gage]

Just talked with the clerk for the Illinois Supreme court. All she could tell me was the the decision was "affirmed" and that Justice Burk wrote it.

I have a million things to do this morning and can't seem to find whether this is a victory or not?

Help!

 

[flying_gage]

Just found it elsewhere...

In a unanimous opinion (written by a Chicago judge, no less), the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Diggins No. 106367, has held:

"Section 24-1.6{c}{iii} of the Criminal Code of 1961 provides that a person is not guilty of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon if that weapon is “unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card.' 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6{c}{iii} (West 2006). In the case at bar, we are asked to determine whether the center console of a vehicle is a 'case' within the meaning of this provision. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that it is."

Wow that is pretty big for us here in Illinois!

 

[ljnowell]

So does this mean that we can carry, unloaded in the center console now, legally? This is a big step forward for IL thats for damn sure.

 

[Phatty]

Here's a link to the supreme court opinion:

http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/SupremeCourt/2009/October/106367.pdf

 

[Phatty]

The case is a big win for Illinois gun owners and clarifies some uncertainties in the law.

Key point:
An unloaded gun may be legally transported in any enclosed container, no matter whether the container is portable or fixed or whether the container is specifically designed to hold firearms.


This means:
Center console is OK.
Glove compartment is OK.
Fanny pack is OK.
Purse is OK.
As long as the above items are completely closed and the gun is not loaded.

Note that the wildlife code still requires a firearm to be transported in a firearm specific case, but a violation of the wildlife code (a petty offense) is a far cry from a violation of the criminal code (felony).

 

[flying_gage]

Holy buckets.... Reading through that the first time is pretty wild in terms of what it could potentially mean...

I think the reality will be different but that will only open up more arrests when people decide to carry in a fanny pack. I really cannot believe the Supreme court left it this open ended and it was unanimous. As I am not a lawyer, I will be interested to hear how people with more knowledge than myself view this.

 

[TimRB]

Congratulations to Illinois shooters--a victory!

I predict:

1) The gun-grabbers will whine that there will now be blood running in the streets.
2) That will not happen.
3) The news media will not mention that it did not happen.

Tim

 

[Kingcreek]

Depending on where you are in Illinois, there is already blood running in the streets. This ruling is a positive for lawful Illinois residents but in reality, it changes very little. Maybe when we get concealed carry passed...

 

[Phatty]

Maybe when we get concealed carry passed...

The ironic thing is that the anti-gun crowd has argued for years that a strict interpretation of the gun transportation laws is necessary or we would have a de facto "concealed carry" law in place. With today's ruling, a woman can carry a purse with a semi-auto pistol and mag inside. It would take her all of about two seconds to insert the mag and chamber a round. I'm not saying we don't really, really need a concealed carry law in Illinois, but the anti's do have a point that there's not a huge difference.

 

[Jeff White]

With today's ruling, a woman can carry a purse with a semi-auto pistol and mag inside. It would take her all of about two seconds to insert the mag and chamber a round. I'm not saying we don't really, really need a concealed carry law in Illinois, but the anti's do have a point that there's not a huge difference.

You don't really believe you could effectively defend yourself with an unloaded semi auto pistol and a loaded magazine in a purse do you?

The antis have no point at all, there is a huge difference between what's now a legal way to carry and true legal concealed carry.

Tell you what, I'll meet you at the range, you can draw from your purse or fanny pack load your weapon and engage the target and I'll draw my loaded 1911 from my IWB holster and we'll see who can effectively engage the target the fastest. I'll even get someone to videotape it and we can post it here for everyone to see. Let me know when you are ready to prove that fanny pack or purse carry of an unloaded weapon is a viable self defense choice............

 

[armoredman]

Jeff, speaking as an AZ member who has never ever had to carry unloaded anything anywhere, I can see this as a positive, and yes, it may be more difficult to load that lawfully carried unloaded gun, (remember New Mexico, before CCW did the came thing, loaded magazine was called NM CCW permit), it's better than having to leave it at home, and gives some small chance to employ it, which is better than none.
Now, what are the IL statutes about USING that lawfully unloaded gun in a hurry for self defense? Are they OK?

 

[chibiker]

Slim glimmer of hope for this state afterall... sort of. Gotta take what you get. Agreed this is a huge step for Illinois, thinking it might help to lay some of the groudwork for greater victories as well.

Tell you what, I'll meet you at the range, you can draw from your purse or fanny pack load your weapon and engage the target and I'll draw my loaded 1911 from my IWB holster and we'll see who can effectively engage the target the fastest. I'll even get someone to videotape it and we can post it here for everyone to see. Let me know when you are ready to prove that fanny pack or purse carry of an unloaded weapon is a viable self defense choice............

On that note Jeff... tell ya what. How about you come at me with a tire iron, ball bat, heck even a big knife for that matter... I don't have a lot of wind but I got some speed for a short bit. I'll carry an unloaded semi in a fanny pack, I'd even be willing to use on of the wife's purses if you insist, loaded mag in a different compartment too. We could video tape the whole thing as well... my bet, you lose. I'm not saying, I'm just saying. It's not perfect but it's a whole lot more than we had before, eh? So you up for it?

 

[Jeff White]

armoredman,

Maybe carrying an unloaded firearm gives some people the warm and fuzzies, but I don't believe any serious instructor would recommend it. I am going to stand by my assertion that an unloaded firearm is just as useful in a fight as not having one.

Now, what are the IL statutes about USING that lawfully unloaded gun in a hurry for self defense? Are they OK?

Yes, the self defense statutes are some of the best in the nation. Illinois law gives you good legal protection if you have to defend yourself, it just doesn't want you to have effective tools to do it with.

This ruling is important because it gives people other options to legally transport their firearms, however, under the Illinois Compiled Statutes one could still receive a ticket for an uncased firearm under the wildlife code. I suppose a fine and points against your hunting license is preferable to a felony UUW charge, but until they put in some kind of language to make the wildlife code violation only applicable while hunting or on your way to or from the hunt, we won't see a big change in how you can carry a firearm. I will continue to recommend that you carry the weapon in a case designed to hold a firearm as required by the wildlife code.

 

[Jeff White]

On that note Jeff... tell ya what. How about you come at me with a tire iron, ball bat, heck even a big knife for that matter... I don't have a lot of wind but I got some speed for a short bit. I'll carry an unloaded semi in a fanny pack, I'd even be willing to use on of the wife's purses if you insist, loaded mag in a different compartment too. We could video tape the whole thing as well... my bet, you lose. I'm not saying, I'm just saying. It's not perfect but it's a whole lot more than we had before, eh? So you up for it?

Yep I'm up for it, when and where....

 

[ilbob]

It was always not illegal. Just that many cops and jurisdictions pretended that there was some question about its legality, although a simple reading of the text should have sufficed. There were several appeals court cases on point, and now an IL supreme court case that affirms it is not illegal (at least under the UUW acts).

As Jeff pointed out you can still get nailed under the wildlife act if the case does not comply with the requirements set forth there.

 

[MisterMike]

Maybe carrying an unloaded firearm gives some people the warm and fuzzies, but I don't believe any serious instructor would recommend it. I am going to stand by my assertion that an unloaded firearm is just as useful in a fight as not having one.

I almost agree, but I'd suggest that having a weapon that's deployable within five or six seconds is better than having none at all. Nonetheless, as you note, it's a far cry from having an immediately usable gun available, as you could in a state permitting concealed carry, and it's not difficult to envision a situation where five seconds could mean the difference between life and death.

My quick reading of the decision leads me to believe that it supports the legality of fanny pack carry. If that were to become commonly accepted, without the antis' predicted bloodbath (which, of course, won't happen), it lends further support to legalizing concealed carry.

 

[chibiker]

Well Jeff, I don't have a fanny pack, so I'll have to root through the wife's purses to see if I can find one that matches my boots ....lol

As far as when and were, well... I'll be at the Kane County Fairgrounds for the gun show on Sunday, they got a big parking lot there. Since I can't shoot you in reality, loser buys the other some gun show jerkey?

 

[ljnowell]

Maybe carrying an unloaded firearm gives some people the warm and fuzzies, but I don't believe any serious instructor would recommend it. I am going to stand by my assertion that an unloaded firearm is just as useful in a fight as not having one.

You know, thats just plain foolish. To say that you might as well not have one is a joke. There are countless variables that play into it, and you most certainly always stand a better chance of using a pistol in defense if you have one on you.

As far as what instructors say? Who gives a crap? They probably instruct people that live in Free states. If you could carry a loaded pistol in a holster and you choose to carry an unloaded one, thats stupid, you are right. To say that its pointless, irrelevant, etc, is just as stupid.

as far as the wildlife act, it specifies that a gun must be unloaded and cased. They redifined the meaning of case, why would the wildlife code be an issue? They simply expanded the meaning of the word case as regarding firearms in the state.

 

[Phatty]

As Jeff pointed out you can still get nailed under the wildlife act if the case does not comply with the requirements set forth there.

"Nailed" is probably a bit too harsh of a term. Think of all the people who completely ignore speed limit laws. They are willing to take the risk of getting a ticket because driving fast (and getting to where they want to go sooner) is worth more to them than the possibility of receiving a speeding ticket.

If you really want to keep an unloaded gun and ammo in your glove compartment, you shouldn't let the wildlife code stand in your way. First, the chances of ever actually getting caught are really, really low. If you are risking a felony convinction, then even that super low chance of getting busted is still too much risk to take. But, if the worst thing that can happen is you get a ticket and have to pay a small fine, you're not really taking a gamble. In fact, driving 10 miles an hour over the speed limit has a much higher risk of getting caught than an unloaded gun in your glove compartment.

Jeff, logistically, is the average city police officer even prepared to give out a wildlife code violation ticket? From the few traffic tickets I have received, I know that the police have pre-made forms that they fill out and check the boxes to indicate what violation has occurred. I don't know if most police officers even have a ticket form with wildlife violations on them.

 

[Phatty]

as far as the wildlife act, it specifies that a gun must be unloaded and cased. They redifined the meaning of case, why would the wildlife code be an issue?

The wildlife code requires that firearms be transported in a case specifically designed to carry firearms. The criminal code only requires that firearms be transported in a generic case. So if you transport a gun in a generic case (such as a glovebox) you are not violating the criminal code, but you are violating the wildlife code.

 

[Jeff White]

As far as when and were, well... I'll be at the Kane County Fairgrounds for the gun show on Sunday, they got a big parking lot there. Since I can't shoot you in reality, loser buys the other some gun show jerkey?

Sounds great except I have already bought tickets to take my grandson to ride Thomas the Tank Engine in Granite City on Sunday. What are you doing next weekend? I propose we use an airsoft pistol and I have a nice piece of foam pipe insulation that can simulate a tire iron.

as far as the wildlife act, it specifies that a gun must be unloaded and cased. They redifined the meaning of case, why would the wildlife code be an issue? They simply expanded the meaning of the word case as regarding firearms in the state.

They did not redefine the meaning of "case" in the Wildlife Code. They clarified the meaning of case in 720 ILCS 5/24-1 in the Criminal Code. The ruling did not address the definition of case found in 520 ILCS 5/1.2b‑1 (part of the Wildlife Code) which reads:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilc...43&ChapterName=WILDLIFE&ActName=Wildlife+Code.

(520 ILCS 5/1.2b‑1) (from Ch. 61, par. 1.2b‑1)
Sec. 1.2b‑1. Case. Case means a container specifically designed for the purpose of housing a gun or bow and arrow device which completely encloses such gun or bow and arrow device by being zipped, snapped, buckled, tied or otherwise fastened with no portion of the gun or bow and arrow device exposed.
(Source: P.A. 84‑150.)

So you may carry an unloaded firearm in the console of your vehicle or in a fanny pack or purse and not be charged with Unlawful Use of Weapons under 720 ILCS 5/24-1 in the criminal code, however you still may be charged and convicted under 520 ILCS 5/2.33 (n) :
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilc...43&ChapterName=WILDLIFE&ActName=Wildlife+Code.

(n) It is unlawful for any person, except persons who possess a permit to hunt from a vehicle as provided in this Section and persons otherwise permitted by law, to have or carry any gun in or on any vehicle, conveyance or aircraft, unless such gun is unloaded and enclosed in a case, except that at field trials authorized by Section 2.34 of this Act, unloaded guns or guns loaded with blank cartridges only, may be carried on horseback while not contained in a case, or to have or carry any bow or arrow device in or on any vehicle unless such bow or arrow device is unstrung or enclosed in a case, or otherwise made inoperable.

That's why the Wildlife Code still matters.

 

[Philo_Beddoe]

The case is a big win for Illinois gun owners and clarifies some uncertainties in the law.

Key point:
An unloaded gun may be legally transported in any enclosed container, no matter whether the container is portable or fixed or whether the container is specifically designed to hold firearms.


This means:
Center console is OK.
Glove compartment is OK.
Fanny pack is OK.
Purse is OK.
As long as the above items are completely closed and the gun is not loaded.

Note that the wildlife code still requires a firearm to be transported in a firearm specific case, but a violation of the wildlife code (a petty offense) is a far cry from a violation of the criminal code (felony).

So if I carry an handgun without a loaded magazaine inserted or a round in the chamber in my hiking/biking backpack I am only in violation of the wildlife code?

 

[Phatty]

So if I carry an handgun without a loaded magazaine inserted or a round in the chamber in my hiking/biking backpack I am only in violation of the wildlife code?

Exactly, as long as the pocket the handgun is in is completely zipped close.

 

[ilbob]

"Nailed" is probably a bit too harsh of a term. Think of all the people who completely ignore speed limit laws. They are willing to take the risk of getting a ticket because driving fast (and getting to where they want to go sooner) is worth more to them than the possibility of receiving a speeding ticket.

If you really want to keep an unloaded gun and ammo in your glove compartment, you shouldn't let the wildlife code stand in your way. First, the chances of ever actually getting caught are really, really low. If you are risking a felony convinction, then even that super low chance of getting busted is still too much risk to take. But, if the worst thing that can happen is you get a ticket and have to pay a small fine, you're not really taking a gamble. In fact, driving 10 miles an hour over the speed limit has a much higher risk of getting caught than an unloaded gun in your glove compartment.

Jeff, logistically, is the average city police officer even prepared to give out a wildlife code violation ticket? From the few traffic tickets I have received, I know that the police have pre-made forms that they fill out and check the boxes to indicate what violation has occurred. I don't know if most police officers even have a ticket form with wildlife violations on them.

Class B misdemeanor.


(520 ILCS 5/2.33) (from Ch. 61, par. 2.33)
Sec. 2.33. (n) It is unlawful for any person, except persons who possess a permit to hunt from a vehicle as provided in this Section and persons otherwise permitted by law, to have or carry any gun in or on any vehicle, conveyance or aircraft, unless such gun is unloaded and enclosed in a case, except that at field trials authorized by Section 2.34 of this Act, unloaded guns or guns loaded with blank cartridges only, may be carried on horseback while not contained in a case, or to have or carry any bow or arrow device in or on any vehicle unless such bow or arrow device is unstrung or enclosed in a case, or otherwise made inoperable.
***
(520 ILCS 5/3.5) (from Ch. 61, par. 3.5)
Sec. 3.5. Penalties; probation.
***
(c) Any person who violates any of the provisions of Sections 2.9, 2.11, 2.16, 2.18, 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, 2.29, 2.30, 2.31, 2.32, 2.33 (except subsections (g), (i), (o), (p), (y), and (cc)), 2.33‑1, 2.33a, 3.3, 3.4, 3.11 through 3.16, 3.19, 3.20, 3.21 (except subsections (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (f.5), (g), (h), and (i)), 3.24, 3.25, and 3.26 (except subsection (f)), including administrative rules, shall be guilty of a Class B misdemeanor.