IANAL, but in reading other IL Supreme Court rulings, they've decided that a permit is the equivalent of a FOID card for the purposes of transport by non-IL residents.
So it would make sense the same would apply to carry.
But the law doesn't always make sense.
(And IIRC, the ruling said "a permit from the person's state of residence"??? So maybe an OOS permit, for those who don't have a home-state permit, wouldn't be valid.)
First, I assume by OOS you mean Out Of State.
I do not claim to have an answer to this, but as a part of the ongoing debate on the Federal Gun Free School Zone Act, a common question is whether an out of state permit qualifies for the exception listed in that law.
(Briefly, the GFSZA forbids the carry of a gun within 1,000 feet of any school property, effectively making virtually every gun carrier in the United States of America a Federal Felon. You are excepted from the law if you hold a permit, thusly:
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;)
There is a letter (
posted on Wikipedia, among other places) from a no-name (not literally, but not from a high official) declaring their opinion that an out of state permit would not be sufficient to meet the exception.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I am not alone in my opinion that an out of state permit would meet the exception codified in the GFSZA.
Here's why: Exactly what is a permit? Is it the physical card or paper or piece of plastic that you carry in your wallet? No. It is an intangible grant of license to do something, in this case, carry a concealed handgun or weapon (depending on what state you are in.) I live in Virginia. Due to Virginia's onerous lack of privacy for CHP holders (applications and all that personal information are deemed "public records" for any would-be home-invader or criminal to peruse at will), I have chosen to obtain an out of state permit, that is on the list that is honored by Virginia. I had the same FBI background check that would have been run during a Virginia application, and Virginia allows (literally permits or licenses) me to carry a concealed handgun based on the satisfactory evaluation of my qualifications performed by that other state. It must be viewed this way, if for no other reason than the fact that no license or decree of any kind by another state can trump local state law. I have to satisfy Virginia's requirements (which the out of state permit does do) to carry a concealed handgun, even though the facts that satisfy the local rules were taken care of by another state.
So when it comes down to it, Virginia does license me to carry a concealed handgun, they just didn't print the card for me.
As we all, know, the GFSZA is almost certainly unconstitutional, especially since
Heller and
McDonald, and nobody knows this better than the United States Department of Justice, so we will never see a case of a sole violation of this law prosecuted, and it is even less likely that we will ever see a court ruling on "what is a permit".
That's my take on it, as worthless as it may be. As I said, I'm not the only one who sees it this way, but in all likelihood, it will never see a full resolution.
TFred
