Illinois AWB is RIDICULOUS

[The Annoyed Man]

Here’s the list: www.ksdk.com, and it’s ridiculous.

Under the new law, my 7+1 capacity semiautomatic Mossberg 930 SPX is an assault weapon because it holds more than 5 rounds in the tube, and it has a pistol grip. Meanwhile, my 20” 8+1 capacity 590A1 isn’t. My 23 round capacity Henry .22 isn’t an AW, while my 25 round M&P 15-22 is, because it accepts a box magazine holding more than 10 rounds and has a pistol grip. And for that matter, I can see my bolt action Ruger Gunsite Scout being called an AW, because it is capable of accepting a magazine of greater than 10 rounds … even though, to the best of my knowledge, nobody makes such a magazine. Why? Because any shotgun accepting a box magazine is now an AW, even the pump guns. Pretty much EVERY single semiautomatic rifle accepting a removable box magazine is now outlawed.

[mayor]

So, how do we stop the cancer before it metastasizes?

[Grayling813]

And these new laws will do nothing to lower the shootings and murders numbers in Illinois.

How long before Illinois starts getting slapped down by SCOTUS like NY has been?

[Soccerdad1995]

IANAL, but I believe this AWB has no legal effect sine it is clearly unconstitutional on it's face. Of course, someone will have to go through the unreimbursed expense and other pain of being the proverbial "test case" first.

[Soccerdad1995]

The real question to me is "does an obviously unconstitutional law have any force of law"?

For example, let's say that a small town somewhere passes a law that says "anyone who votes for a democratic candidate is guilty of a felony punishable by a minimum of 30 years in prison". Further assume that this does not make national news and since the town is full of republicans no one ever gets charged or prosecuted under this law.

Does the law have any validity whatsoever? Or, since the Constitution is the ultimate law of the land, and this clearly violates the constitution on it's face, can we say that this law is, in fact, invalid?

And further to that, would a LEO have immunity if they were to forcibly arrest someone who "violated" this obviously unconstitutional law (before any court had the opportunity to strike it down)?

Now apply the same logic to the unconstitutional Illinois AWB.

[puma guy]

the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip

The Mauser Assault Pistol

[pushpullpete]

In the article that TAM posted a link to, the first paragraph states a ban on the manufacture or possession of the listed weapons. Paragraph three
states that Illinois gun manufacturers can continue to manufacture and sell those weapons to suppliers in other states. Mommy says yes while Daddy says no. Somebody didn't read what they were signing into law or maybe just didn't understand it.
At least there is a minimal impact to in state gun manufacturers, although it is still unconstitutional. YMMV

[Flightmare]

[The Annoyed Man]

So far, 67 county sheriffs are vowing not to enforce the new law.


I think that leaves 30-odd counties that either haven’t made an announcement yet, or who will be enforcing it.

[srothstein]

The real question to me is "does an obviously unconstitutional law have any force of law"?

For example, let's say that a small town somewhere passes a law that says "anyone who votes for a democratic candidate is guilty of a felony punishable by a minimum of 30 years in prison". Further assume that this does not make national news and since the town is full of republicans no one ever gets charged or prosecuted under this law.

Does the law have any validity whatsoever? Or, since the Constitution is the ultimate law of the land, and this clearly violates the constitution on it's face, can we say that this law is, in fact, invalid?

And further to that, would a LEO have immunity if they were to forcibly arrest someone who "violated" this obviously unconstitutional law (before any court had the opportunity to strike it down)?

Now apply the same logic to the unconstitutional Illinois AWB.

There is a point you have missed in your analysis that is best answered by answering your hypothetical case. The answer is that yes, the officer would have immunity. There is a legal presumption that ALL laws are constitutional until a court rules otherwise.

And that means that, at least in the eyes of the law, there is no such thing as an obviously unconstitutional law. I tend to disagree with the courts and a lot of legal presumptions, including this one. For example, I always thought the Second Amendment was pretty clear on its own but many of the courts seem to disagree with me. I thought the Bruen decision made what laws would be acceptable pretty clear. But the 2nd Circuit judges and the government of New York (among others) again seem to disagree with me.

[Bolton Strid]

Of course, someone will have to go through the unreimbursed expense and other pain of being the proverbial "test case" first.

Such as the state of Illinois, along with any other jurisdiction including the federal government and its various agencies and departments who insist on ruling and regulating as if NYSRPA v. Bruen (2022) & West Virginia v. EPA never happened. The stink is all on them and they're all going to have to get a beat down step by step. Seems that's the way they want it, so they'll get it.

[RoyGBiv]

Still trying to locate the source (and a clearer image) for this posted in another forum....

Bottom line... not many of the States' counties will enforce this stupid unconstitutional law.

EDIT:
Better map and source link....
https://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.p ... s/page/23/

[RoyGBiv]

The citizens of Virginia are not taking lightly the stuff the Dems in their state would like to do to gun rights....

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/it- ... onal-laws/

It begins: Virginia forms active militia to protect sheriffs, citizens from unconstitutional laws

Earlier in the week, we reported on how lawmakers over in Virginia were threatening to use the National Guard if members of local law enforcement refused to enforce laws passed in the state that they felt violated the second amendment.

Well, looks like Tazewell County isn’t going down without a fight. On top of calling themselves a second amendment sanctuary county, they’re also crafting a militia as well.

[Grayling813]

Herschel’s take on the Illinois Sheriffs over at The Captain’s Journal
https://www.captainsjournal.com/2023/01 ... inois-awb/

Merely refusing to assist the state police isn’t doing anyone any good. For this to have teeth the Sheriffs would need to ensure that not only were they constitutional Sheriffs, but their deputies were constitutional deputies as well, and that the city and township PDs agreed with this stance. Those are the preconditions for success.

That would all lead to the next necessary step, which would be a threat to arrest any state police who came into their counties to enforce the new law, and the stomach to follow through with it. Finally, if those counties have militia to whom the Sheriff could go for assistance, that may prove to be necessary as well.

Do any of the Sheriffs have the stomach for this? I seriously doubt it. I’ve said before, nullification laws or threats are dangerous for the citizens if they aren’t serious and don’t carry both the threat and reality of force behind them. If they are weighty and enforced, they serve as a check on centralized power and authority to infringe on God-given rights.

[K.Mooneyham]

The citizens of Virginia are not taking lightly the stuff the Dems in their state would like to do to gun rights....

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/it- ... onal-laws/

It begins: Virginia forms active militia to protect sheriffs, citizens from unconstitutional laws

Earlier in the week, we reported on how lawmakers over in Virginia were threatening to use the National Guard if members of local law enforcement refused to enforce laws passed in the state that they felt violated the second amendment.

Well, looks like Tazewell County isn’t going down without a fight. On top of calling themselves a second amendment sanctuary county, they’re also crafting a militia as well.

Did you happen to notice the date of that article? It was back in 2019. Things have changed in Virginia, and I don't think that state is going to try to send the National Guard after anyone's guns there. I don't want to say that Virginia is back in the fold as a "red state", but again, things have changed there from how it was in 2019.