Illegal Arrest In Illinois

Status
Not open for further replies.
+1 Bluesman.


M1911 wrote: "The legal definitions for the words above (including "case", "firearm carrying box", "shipping box", "or other container") may not be the same as common usage."


I would have to ask, then, WHERE ARE THE "LEGAL DEFINITIONS" OF THESE WORDS FOUND?

And I would argue that if there is not a definition of "case," "firearm carrying box," "shipping box," and most importantly "OTHER CONTAINER" somewhere to be found in the Illinois statutes, then "common usage" would HAVE to be what applies.

Laws that cannot be comprehended cannot be obeyed by those at whom they are targeted. And if a law cannot be comprehended sufficiently so that the public can go confidently knowing they are acting within the law, then the law is over-vague and should be deemed unconstitutional and invalid.


-azurefly
 
M1911 said:
That depends upon whether "container" is defined elsewhere in the law or by precedent. It is possible that under IL law, the word "container" is defined to mean something other than the common usage.
Click to expand...


You say, "It is possible" that the word "container" is given a specific definition -- one that is contrary to the intuitive common usage -- somewhere in IL law. If so, WHERE IS THAT DEFINITION MADE AVAILABLE TO THOSE SUBJECT TO THE LAW?

This case has echos of the attempts that people made to comply with the CA assault weapons bans. I have read that people ran afoul of the law even though they made every effort to comply, because the law was (deliberately?) written too vaguely to know for certain which guns were allowed and which were forbidden.


I guess it depends on what the definitions of the following words or terms are:

"IS" :barf:
"CONTAINER" :barf:
"ASSAULT WEAPON" :barf:


-azurefly
 
I think we are all missing an important point here.

Does the mall have a sign that says "No guns allowed", and if so, does Illinois allow for punishment if you carry on the premesis?

I hope that makes sense...

What I am trying to say is that maybe he would be ok carrying everywhere else with his pistol like that, but because the mall had that sign at the door, it made him in violation.

Do you have to comply with mall security? Sounds like he would have been better off to kick some butt and leave, "mace anyone?" :D

Regardless, best of luck.
 
Sounds like he was following the "LETTER" of the law. I also think many here are missing the point he was trying to make. He is pushing for change in the state of Illinois, (justifiably so), by educating law enforcement on the laws they percieve him to be breaking.
How many times will cases like this have to be dismissed before the state begins to educate it's employees, who knows, but bully for him for for having the stones to be one of those cases.
And why anyone would suggest that a man like this, one who his willing to stand for his rights, should flee to more friendly CCW states, is beyond logic.
 
Well, instead of wondering what a case is... From the Illinois gun law FAQ (put out by the state):

What constitutes a legal “case”?
The Criminal Code refers to a “case, firearm carrying 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.”

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/ptfire.pdf#search='illinois%20gun%20law'
 
Citation from Illinois 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.)

Illinois Wildlife Code

And here's the (nutty) gun laws:
Illinois Weapons Law
 
I always like to read these "personal letter" stories where some poor sap claims how the system has done him wrong, that he is so completely innocent, and his story always sounds so whole milk wholesome. I don't know what is or is not true in the story, but something isn't right and I have trouble believing all of these sorts of stories as being completely true. Those pleading NOT Guilty are always completely innocent of the charges, or so they claim.

Let me draw your attention to ...
http://www.rrstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060730/OPINION/107300009/1022/OPINION

The whole business about scheduling an appointment to talk to the school president about people having the right to carry guns on campus and wearing the ICARRY jacket and thigh holster was just plain stupid. He knows it is state law and so the school president can't do squat about his issue. He went in to the office looking like he was carrying a gun such that the secretary didn't know one way or the other. Apparently, she thought him a nut. Go figure.

I understand he is hoping to change things, but playing the gun version of being in the AFL CIO isn't slick at all. He may or may not have broken any laws, but I have trouble with the notion of crying for him because he is intentionally forcing conflicts. From reading various accounts of this guy's arrests online, he tries to witness to the officers, police chiefs, or anyone else about guns, law, the Constitution, etc. just like some religious zealot.

As a pro-gun person, I would expect him to be honest. From www.icarry.org ...
You will see how 48 states in the country have embraced concealed carry provision, and how it has caused the crime rates to plummet.
Click to expand...

That is amazing, crime has plummeted in all states but 2 because of concealed carry? I don't think so.
 
Crime doesn't drop when concealed carry is enacted. It slightly shifts from crimes against people walking around to crimes against property, with a more intensified focus on people known beyond a doubt to be unarmed, such as foreign tourists in Florida.
 
Honesty?

Fanny pack and thigh holster are not exactly synonyms in my dictionary. I was pretty worked up at first, but reading the newspaper account...a little different light is shed on this topic.

I used to “fanny-pack,” like so many others, and did so on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

They followed and stopped us and then questioned me about the buckled case I wore on my side.
Click to expand...

It sounds like he was trolling for an arrest.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Hence the reason he modified a holster. A fannypack wouldn't have met the defition of a case because it could be argue that a fanny pack isn't specifically designed to hold a firearm (though, really, is there any other reason to have a fanny pack?? lol).
 
All I know is that anyone who wears a fanny pack to carry their gun deserves to be arrested, no matter what the law says.
 
But it wasn't a fanny pack, was it? It sounds like it was a modified holster. I'm imagining something like a large leatherman case or an Israeli flap holster. I don't think anything made of thick, inflexible ballistic nylon (or similar) qualifies as a fanny pack.
 
All I know is that anyone who wears a fanny pack to carry their gun deserves to be arrested, no matter what the law says.
Click to expand...


Spoken like someone who never tried to carry in a hot climate. :rolleyes:


-azurefly
 
will someone please post a pic of this container,baggie or other storage device..not a sortof but an exact image?


the suspense is killing me ..


wouldnt there be camera images of the alledged violation in the mall as well?though it wouldnt be possable unless they record their radio traffic, Id like to hear the mall ninja conversions during the incident as well.the body cavity search was grossly over the edge.
 
Redwork - gdm asked for a picture of the exact item - not just a generic fanny pack. There is some speculation that the firearm was contained in a modified holster and not in a true fanny pack.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top