Illinois???

[jke456]

If I was your friend I would get a good lawyer and hope that the judge or jury would actually follow the letter of the law.

His gun was not immediately accessible which technically by Illinois law means he was legal, but a loaded gun in your vehicle will get you arrested every time in Illinois.

As far as him being dinged by the wildlife code a good lawyer should be able to get that thrown out as in Illinois we have no game that can be hunted with a .25 pistol, so I fail to see how he is culpable under the wild life code.

jon

 

[scout26]

Ah that explains part of it, the gun sock I have doesn't have any ties!

Sew some velcro on it so that it closes and you're good to go !!!

 

[TexasRifleman]

they ask if they could search his truck...he said yes

Why would anyone EVER say yes to that......

 

[scout26]

so I fail to see how he is culpable under the wild life code.

jke456, go back an read post #16 again, the Wildlife code (520 ILCS 5/2.30)does cover the transport of firearms, therefore is applicable and that's why he was charged under that statue. Good luck finding a lawyer who'll argue that the Wildlife Code doesn't apply.

From the Illinois State Police website: http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

How can I legally transport a firearm on my person or in my vehicle?

There is more than one way to legally transport a firearm. However, in order to be in compliance with all statutes, it is recommended all firearms be transported:
Unloaded,
Enclosed in a case and,
By persons who have a valid FOID card.

What constitutes a legal "case" for transporting a firearm?

The Criminal Code refers to "a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container." However, the Wildlife Code is more specific, defining case as "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."

 

[jke456]

Yeah i get all that but I also know of at least 2 cases that were won by the defendant when they were carrying in a fanny pack, which is also supposedly illegal in Illinois.

I think a good lawyer could convince a jury that a .25 pistol does not come under the wildlife code.

I know that if I were gonna be convicted of a felony, lose my ccw as well as all gun rights that I would sure try this approach and argue like h#@@.


I would also be arguing that under the 14 and 2nd amendmants that the state has no right to deny me the bearing of arms

jon

 

[Autolycus]

The Bill of Rights does not matter in IL. Look at our state constitution and read what it says in regards to the right to keep and bear arms.

I believe the actual wording is:

Originally from the Illinois Constitution and its' Bill of Rights:
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: Illinois Constitution.)

Link to Text of Illinois Constitution

Scary huh? Police power? I wonder how the Founding Fathers would have thought about that?

 

[scout26]

Yeah i get all that but I also know of at least 2 cases that were won by the defendant when they were carrying in a fanny pack, which is also supposedly illegal in Illinois.

Yes, because the firearm was 1) Unloaded, 2) enclosed in a case specifically designed for transporting a firearm, and 3) the person carrying it had a vaild FOID card.

I think a good lawyer could convince a jury that a .25 pistol does not come under the wildlife code.

"While the attorney for the defendant points out the .25 cal pistol is not legal for hunting in Illinois, I'll point out to the jury that the Wildlife Code states "to have or carry any gun in or on any vehicle, conveyance or aircraft," not just ones normally used for hunting, therefore the law is applicable in this case.

Although I doubt it would get to that point. You'd have to get the judge to rule on your pre-trial motion that the Wildlife code statue does not apply. Again the statue, as written, is pretty clear, inaddition to lots of case law where people have been successfullly prosecuted under the Wildlife COde who were not hunting. Not much wiggle room there.

 

[jke456]

Your preaching to the choir. Life long resident.

If the BOR doesn't matter here then I suppose that my local town board ought to be able to ban certain religions and outlaw all press that doesn't agree with them?

Until someone challenges the states on their bs police powers via the federal constitution namely the bor plus the 14th then we will have communist states such as Illinois.

Not sure what i'm actually trying to say came out right but I believe you get the gist.

And I would still fight tooth and nail to keep my gun rights over some bs search that netted me a felony charge on a wildlife code that really truly has nothing to do with a .25 pistol.


I believe that the lady in salem Illinois fanny pack was noit specifacally designed to carry a pistol if I remeber right , could be wrong but don't think so.
Also if I rember right John horstmen had just a standard every day fanny pack.

jon

 

[scout26]

They let him pass and gave him a ticket for have an uncased weapon

He's not charged with a felony, they just gave him a ticket (misdemeanor).

I believe that the lady in salem Illinois fanny pack was noit specifacally designed to carry a pistol if I remeber right , could be wrong but don't think so.
Also if I rember right John horstmen had just a standard every day fanny pack.

Mr. Horstman's unloaded Taurus was found in a "day planner" style carry case It was a case specifically designed to carry a firearm. One reason why the charges were dropped by Joe Birkett. There is a difference between having the charges dropped and being found innocent , therefore setting a case law precident.

Same with Vana Haggerty, the State's attorney dropped the UUW (IOW Concealed Carry) charges the day before the trial. She was found guilty of selling brass knuckles. Again, since the UUW charges were dropped, there was no precident set in case law.

Brunner vs Illinois is the only "Fanny Pack Carry" case I'm aware of: http://concealcarry.org/illinoisvbrunner.htm

Finally, This has been cussed and discussed over and over again.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=304153
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=3777526

and not just here but also at TFL:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...ght=fanny+pack
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...ght=fanny+pack
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...ght=fanny+pack

 

[Karate]

Thanks...and no my friend does not look like a drug dealer...just a clean cut hard work joe like most everybody else...It was a drug check point...that ask him if he had an illegal drugs in the vehicle and he no...then nicely ask if he minded if they checked...he said go ahead...when they found the .25 Beretta they told hi to put his hands on his head and not move or the dog would attack...then cuffed him...All of that really sucks...

 

[ShunZu]

As far as I can tell, I can have a gun in my center console, as long as it it in a case, unloaded, and I have my FOID card.

Absolutely correct. A loaded magazine NOT in the gun is also allowed, in the same case. Case by their definition means a case designed for firearm transport - not a suitcase. As I said earlier, it comes into action reasonably quickly if carried in the vehicle in this manner if the Zombies are after you.

Be advised that E. St. Louis has a city ordinance that disallows ANY transportation of ANY firearm, even in a case in the trunk. I can't imagine how guys legally go hunting if they live in that city.... Slingshots for geese, I guess.

Yes, Illinois is convoluted. Without a doubt, the worst state in the Union for gun owners. Any questions on why we have E. St. Louis and Chicago -- two of the most deadly cities to live in anywhere in the world. Per capita, E. St. Louis is #1 for murder and many other violent crimes.

 

[ilbob]

His gun was not immediately accessible which technically by Illinois law means he was legal, but a loaded gun in your vehicle will get you arrested every time in Illinois.

He was not in violation of the UUW act. That does not mean he was legal. He may not have been speeding either. That doesn't mean he didn't violate some other traffic law.

As far as him being dinged by the wildlife code a good lawyer should be able to get that thrown out as in Illinois we have no game that can be hunted with a .25 pistol, so I fail to see how he is culpable under the wild life code.

No where in the wildlife code does it say that the wildlife code only applies while hunting. In fact, he would have been in violation of the wildlife code even if it was unloaded, unless the gun was encased as specified in the wildlife code.

 

[isp2605]

CCW is illegal in Illinois, I believe even for off duty LEO's.

Wrong answer Alex Trebek. Pick another category.
Off duty IL LEOs have always been allowed to carry. With passage of LEOSA off duty LEOs from any state can carry in IL and all other states.

they can't just pull over and search every car without consent. They have no PC. What gives? Is IL really that much of a People's Republik?

It what is known as a consent search. As Car Knocker and a couple of others have answered - no PC is needed. The occupant of the vehicle consented to the search. Not just an IL thing, consent searches are legal in all states.

I think a good lawyer could convince a jury that a .25 pistol does not come under the wildlife code.

Sorry but you're absolutely wrong. All firearms come under the Wildlife Code, including a .25 and some air guns. You don't have to be hunting for the Wildlife Code for that section to apply. That's just another section of the Criminal Code that's titled Wildlife Code and does not restrict or limit the enforcement only to wildlife incidents. Please, don't try providing legal advice when you don't have any knowledge of the law. It's suggestions such as yours that will end up getting some innocent Joe in deep legal trouble. Also, please don't spout off about "good lawyer could convince a jury" such and such. You're putting words in an attorney's mouth when you don't have any knowledge of the law and have shown you don't know what a good attorney will say. Trying to use the fanny pack "exception" as grounds for your argument is way off base as 1) it is irrelevant in this case having completely different set of circumstances and 2) as scout26 mentioned the fanny pack cases you mention were dismissed and therefore no case precedent was set.
A good attorney will tell you that the Wildlife Code applies. A good attorney will know and have researched case law to be able to show you case law applies.

and no my friend does not look like a drug dealer...just a clean cut hard work joe like most everybody else...

What's a drug dealer look like? If you think all drug dealers are long haried, dirty, unemployed people then you're just operating on the stereo-typical movie image. Drug dealers look like "clean cut hard working joes". They come in all races, sexes, and ages. 2 of the biggest mules we stopped before I retired were people driving campers. They were white couples in their 60s. Another large mule we stopped was a couple of construction workers driving a company truck to the next site. All those were hauling over 100 lbs of coke each. Semi drivers have also been used as mules for not only the dope but also the money. The successful dope dealers are those who look like the "clean cut hard working Joe" because they blend in with society and don't stand out.

anwas a drug check point

Could not have been a drug check point in IL. Those are illegal. Only checkpoints in IL that are legal are DUI checkpoints. However, if a person comes thru a DUI checkpoint with a load of dope, or a loaded gun, that doesn't mean they get a free pass. All violations of the law can be charged.

and that he could be put in jail for 24 hours before allowing him to post bail...

He misunderstood them. For a felony there is no bond. He would have to see a judge who would then set the bail amount. That could be 24 hrs in jail or it could be the weekend.

They let him pass and gave him a ticket for have an uncased weapon....IS IT REALLY A FELONY IN ILLINOIS TO HAVE A LOADED WEAPON IN YOUR CAR?...that seem extreme...I thought this was America

It is a felony in IL, and a lot of other states. He got lucky, real lucky, that he was only charged with uncased gun. They could have also written him a misdemeanor gun transportation charge too which would be a trip to jail to post bond and then a trip back to appear for court.
People need to wake up about gun laws. Too many people, including a lot on this site and others, think getting picked up for a gun violation is not a big deal. Some, as we've seen here, will give outlandishly incorrect advice which is contrary to the law and prior case law. Gun laws are a big deal. You get a felony conviction and your days as a gun owner are over as are a lot of your other rights. It will also cost you thousands of dollars in fines, costs, and attorney fees. As others have said, if you are traveling with a gun then you need to know the laws.

 

[Karate]

I agree on the part about it being hard for LEO to find drug dealers and they do no have a certain and never meant to imply that...there was a major drug bust in my area a few years back and it involved the LEO...which seems to occurring more and more frequently these days...this not a slam on LEO because I know that there are more good ones, no great ones than there are bad ones...just a fact


I assumed that this was a drug stop...simply because he told me there were drug dogs present...sorry for the mis statement

and I do believe that gun laws should be taken seriously...since this incident has taken place I have been in contact with the AG offices of several states to find out the proper transport methods in there state...and there are very few that have as restrictive gun laws as Illinois...that is provided that the individual has a valid CCW...sorry that is just a fact...doesn't make me dislike Illinois any more or less just the truth

 

[Autolycus]

Originally posted by ISP2605: It is a felony in IL, and a lot of other states. He got lucky, real lucky, that he was only charged with uncased gun. They could have also written him a misdemeanor gun transportation charge too which would be a trip to jail to post bond and then a trip back to appear for court.
People need to wake up about gun laws. Too many people, including a lot on this site and others, think getting picked up for a gun violation is not a big deal. Some, as we've seen here, will give outlandishly incorrect advice which is contrary to the law and prior case law. Gun laws are a big deal. You get a felony conviction and your days as a gun owner are over as are a lot of your other rights. It will also cost you thousands of dollars in fines, costs, and attorney fees. As others have said, if you are traveling with a gun then you need to know the laws.

In general it seems that these people are from states outside of Illinois.

 

[ilbob]

I assumed that this was a drug stop...simply because he told me there were drug dogs present...sorry for the mis statement

It may well have been a de facto drug stop.

As I understand it, it is not legal for police to set up checkpoints in Illinois except for a few limited cases, and I am not sure drug checkpoints are one of them. That does not mean they would not do so and claim it is for some other legal reason. The presence of drug sniffing dogs would tend to indicate one of the true reasons.

Hopefully, your friend and everyone else learned the proper lesson from this case. NEVER volunteer anything to police when approached by them in an official capacity. There is NEVER a good reason to do so. It is NEVER in your best interest. How many times does this need to be said before people understand it?

There are minimum non-voluntary things you may be required to comply with when interacting with a P.O. They will often lie about what those things are, so do not believe anything they say about such things. it is best if you know what the real case is before such interaction.

It occured to me that perhaps there might be a situation where you would want to volunteer something, and that would be if you want to be arrested.

 

[isp2605]

and there are very few that have as restrictive gun laws as Illinois...

The only restrictions IL has on transporting a firearm is that it be unloaded and in a case. The only restriction on IL residents is they have to have a FOID card. There are no other state restrictions. A lot of other states have a lot more restrictions than IL.

it is not legal for police to set up checkpoints in Illinois except for a few limited cases, and I am not sure drug checkpoints are one of them. That does not mean they would not do so and claim it is for some other legal reason. The presence of drug sniffing dogs would tend to indicate one of the true reasons.

Checkpoints in IL for anything other than DUI are not permitted by the ILSC. No drug, no DL, no registration. The ILSC has been very specific that checkpoints have to be for DUIs. The USSC has also established very strict guidelines that have to be met and followed. One of those requirements is the place for the checkpoint has to show there is a DUI problem. That can be met by showing something like previous DUI arrests in the area or DUI related crashes.
Just because there are K-9s present doesn't imply anything. The courts have limited when K-9s can be used. Just walking a K-9 around every car is not permitted. As I wrote earlier, any other violations found during a DUI checkpoint are fair game and the person can be cited or arrested. I ran DUI checkpoints for several years averaging about 3 per month. We never failed to make DUI arrests. We also never failed to get some criminal arrests including drugs, wanted on warrants, and illegal possession of guns. In the firearm arrests it was extremely rare, and I can't think of any, where the subject who was arrested did not have a history of arrests. Just goes to show the kind of people we were dealing with. They weren't the average law abiding citizens.
RE the K-9s, if when stopping someone they give the indications we look for when dealing with drug dealers, then that gives us the reasonable suspicion to run the K-9 around their car. That is one of the reasons for the K-9s being present at the details. Troops are trained to look for certain indicators and responses which are typical of drug dealers.
In addition, when we run these kinds of details those chosen for the detail are first volunteers. K-9 officers tend to volunteer for details such extra duty. That's their nature. That's why they have the K-9s to begin with. They volunteered for these details before they were assigned a K-9. They're usually a more dedicated officer to likes to get involved. So when a DUI checkpoint detail becomes available Troops like K-9 officers tend to volunteer first. They're not volunteering because of the K-9, they're volunteering because they're the kind of officer who likes to get involved in things.

Hopefully, your friend and everyone else learned the proper lesson from this case. NEVER volunteer anything to police when approached by them in an official capacity. There is NEVER a good reason to do so. It is NEVER in your best interest. How many times does this need to be said before people understand it?

The one thing you don't want to do either is lie when asked questions. That is one of the indicators. You lie and don't expect for the stop to be of short duration. Honest people don't lie because they have nothing to hide. If a person is caught lying about one thing then what else are they lying about. That's what police work is all about. People whine and snivel because "the police aren't out there catching real crooks." That's exactly what the police are trying to do and when someone is caught in a lie then they have just given the indication the same as the crook. Until the police find out who are the crooks and who is just a liar it's going to take a bit longer.
And don't lie to the feds. That will get a person prison time.

 

[ilbob]

The one thing you don't want to do either is lie when asked questions.

It is better to volunteer nothing at all beyond the minimum requirements. It is generally not even necessary to speak.

 

[isp2605]

It is better to volunteer nothing at all beyond the minimum requirements. It is generally not even necessary to speak.

Why not just act normal? Try playing games and a person wil find out they aren't that good of a poker player.
The reason for the questions on the stop is to find those who are not acting like normal people giving normal responses.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

In fairness we should put up signs at the border like Canada does regarding its gun laws. The only way out for IL is national reciprocity of CCW permits.
FOID cards are an anachronism that really does nothing but trip up the fellow who failed to send in his five bucks and force a drive to Indiana for the criminal trying to buy ammo. Sure, anyone driving around with a firearm ought to know well the laws of the state he or she is entering--but the draconian laws Illinois has regarding firearms just drive a further wedge between law enforcement and honest citizens where none should exist. And yes there are 'worse' states--but that doesn't make the situation here any better.

 

[isp2605]

If you don't like the law then contact your legislator to have the laws changed. No one in LE voted on a single law. That's the role of the legislature. They passed the laws and unless the SC rules the law unconstitutional then only the legislature can change or remove a law.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

No one in LE voted on a single law.
No doubt on that. It's a bad situation for those in the law enforcement community in Illinois as well.

 

[Autolycus]

Ah but those in LE do agree with the laws as their actions indicate they do. If we have the right to keep and bear arms how does one determine that a gun is illegal? If you agree with something support it, however if you disagree do not support it. Its similar to the quote by Noam Chomsky in my signature line.



(I just want to stir up some debate.)

 

[Autolycus]

Originally posted by Neo-Luddite: In fairness we should put up signs at the border like Canada does regarding its gun laws. The only way out for IL is national reciprocity of CCW permits.
FOID cards are an anachronism that really does nothing but trip up the fellow who failed to send in his five bucks and force a drive to Indiana for the criminal trying to buy ammo. Sure, anyone driving around with a firearm ought to know well the laws of the state he or she is entering--but the draconian laws Illinois has regarding firearms just drive a further wedge between law enforcement and honest citizens where none should exist. And yes there are 'worse' states--but that doesn't make the situation here any better.

I agree with you about national reciprocity. Its probably the only way IL will get CCW.

Ah but the LE are partially responsible just as are the non-LE.

 

[scout26]

LEO's do not get a choice in which laws they choose to uphold, they are sworn to uphold them all.

However they are allowed/encouraged to use their discretion. (I.E. You don't kill a fly with a sledgehammer) As was exhibited in this case. They could have charged the OP's friend with a felony, but instead issued him a (misdemeanor) ticket. Plus how many people here have been given a warning instead of full-blown speeding tickets, or tickets with their speed listed as below what they were actually doing (Raises hand twice.), so that the fine is less or not the automatic reckless driving charge.

Tecumseh, I don't think you want a Cop with a socialist/communist viewpoint doing the investigation of someone breaking into you house and stealing you stuff. "Well you're obviously a bourgeois oppressor and the proletariet were merely redistributing the results of your ill-gotten gains to the masses. Therefore if anyone committed a crime, it was you Tecumseh.", as he slaps the cuffs on you and takes you away to be re-educated.