Illinois Supreme Court says OK to store guns in vehicle consols

imported post

Broondog wrote:

the case is behind the seat of the truck with one latch open and a speedloader on the seat.

Click to expand...

That practice is actually a citable offense in WI since. It is a typical citation received by many during deer season up here, many hard cases have 4 latches, if all 4 are not fully latched, chances are you will be cited if caught. So be careful in WI if you ever visit.

I would also expect an IL stormtrooper to cite for the same thing.

imported post

Ok, so I'm still not clear on this from this thread and the ruling although perhaps I misread/read over the answer:
As a frequent visitor to IL: As an out of state resident who enters IL, if I have my sidearm unloaded and have the sidearm and mag in the closed center console as in the court case (or maybe it needs to be in a locked/lockable compartment - that part of the ruling wasn't clear to me either), am I ok to go under this ruling and IL law? Or is this the matter on which we are still awaiting an answer?

This is an important question to me as about monthly I am in a situation where I visit a relative in a high crime, fairly dangerous area in MO and then go to directly across the river to IL to visit other relatives. Between the two locations there is no good place to stop, unholster, unload, case & lock my sidearm before crossing into IL without going pretty far out of my way. Other times I have to unexpectedly go to IL from MO (I live near the Mississippi) and don't typically have a firearm case in my vehicle which means that now I have a hassle.

If I can now simply unload and stow my sidearm in the console or glovebox it would make my life WAY easier.

imported post

Maybe I can clear it up. Keep in mind IANAL.

Nothing in the law has changed with this case. The IL SC just stated what everyone involved knew all along - that specifically a center console meets the requirements of the UUW act for the exemption to the general rule that you can't have a gun in your car. The exemption states:

iii) are 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;

Click to expand...

Why the phrase "other container" has confounded LE and SA in the state (at least in a few areas) is amazing to me (note use of sarcasm).

Note that the way the law is written,non-residents are not eligible for this exception as they cannot get a FOID. NR would have to comply with one of the other 2 exceptions.

(i) are broken down in a non-functioning state; or
(ii) are not immediately accessible;

Click to expand...

So, a NR would need to break down his gun or make it not immediately accessible to avoid tripping up over the UUW act.

Nothing in this case changes anything in the Wildlife Code which has more stringent requirements for having a gun in your car. Despite what some people have claimed, the WC does not limit the applicability of the requirements to only those engaged in hunting, and people have been charged and convicted over WC gun in car violations who were not hunting.

You might think that exception(ii) would allow you to keep a loaded gun in the trunk. It really does nothing of the sort. It just means it is might not bea UUW charge. Its still a class B WC violation. 180 days in jail is nothing to sneeze at.

As for the Chicago issue, IL has something enshrined in its state constitution called home rule. Basically, any home rule entity (Chicago is one) can make up just about any law they want. They can criminalize anything. They can't make it a felony though. So several home rule entities have passed various laws on firearms that are more restictive than the state law. Pre-emption of firearms regulations would be nice, but it will be hard to get. Presumably if you are passing through Chicago in compliance with FOPA rules, you would be OK, but Chicago PD plays by its own rules sometimes.

imported post

As applied to the center console anyway:



Non-residents who have permits or license to possess firearms in their own states are exempt from the FOID act. Since they are exempt any statutory exemption granted an FOID card holder should be valid to a non-resident.



Since, they have been exempted from needing the FOID and can’t even get one if they wanted too, section 24-1(a)(4)(iii) must apply to non-residents.



That being said, there has been no case law on that issue that I am aware of that supports that interpretation. The fact that you can be exempted from the requirement to have an FOID and at the same time not be entitled to the very exemptions that the FOID card allows is in itself a contradiction. It certainly is fodder for an equal protection claim.

imported post

i always thought you could carry a firearm in your glovebox if it locked like in the dash

and the ammo seperate like in the trunk or visaversa

imported post

churchmouse wrote:

i always thought you could carry a firearm in your glovebox if it locked like in the dash

and the ammo seperate like in the trunk or visaversa

Click to expand...

you mean in Illinois, or generally?

certainly not generally -this would be unlawful concealed carry in most states.

imported post

lockman wrote:

As applied to the center console anyway:



Non-residents who have permits or license to possess firearms in their own states are exempt from the FOID act. Since they are exempt any statutory exemption granted an FOID card holder should be valid to a non-resident.



Since, they have been exempted from needing the FOID and can’t even get one if they wanted too, section 24-1(a)(4)(iii) must apply to non-residents.



That being said, there has been no case law on that issue that I am aware of that supports that interpretation. The fact that you can be exempted from the requirement to have an FOID and at the same time not be entitled to the very exemptions that the FOID card allows is in itself a contradiction. It certainly is fodder for an equal protection claim.

Click to expand...

You are engaging in a dangerous practice of mixing and matching statutes.

I don't see any reading of the UUW statute that would equate FOID cards with NR licenses.

It could end up as an equal protection issue, but that will be decided in federal court, not here. So far, the hundreds of people who have strayed into NY state and been arrested as NR having handguns intheir possession have either not made this claim or have been unable to have it sustained.

imported post

(10) Nonresidents who are currently licensed or
registered to possess a firearm in their resident state;

Bob the above cite is directly from the FOID act as being exempt from obtaining the card.

The conflict is there and even the Illinois State police websight "recommends" transport that meets (i) or (ii) for non residents, they do not state it is a requirement.

imported post

Wildlife requires to be in a case made for the firearm. If you can still be arrested under that law the console would have to be very big. Big enough to fit a gun case.

My uneducated guess would have to be that a case is a case whether it is made for a gun or not as long as it is unloaded and houses the gun completley and is zipped closed latched etc.

imported post

Design the case for a firearm. Problem with wildlife code solved.