Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Illinois Glockers' Club (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=148)
-   -   Center Console Question (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1176218)

SIUC4 01-26-2010 22:13

Center Console Question
 
I have read the legislation and it is my understanding that you can carry your weapon in center console and glove box.
I hear people are still getting into some trouble of this situation??
I carry my holstered G22 unloaded in my center console and have a couple fully loaded magazines in the bottom of the console...
Anyone see a problem with this, I never get a strait answer from the LE around here because quite honestly alot of them are themselves unclear on this subject....

05FLHT 01-27-2010 09:24

The UUW Statute says the firearm must either be 1) disassembled into an inoperable state, 2) inaccessible or 3) unloaded and fully enclosed in a case. The IL SC recently ruled in Diggins that a center console constitutes a case, as defined by the UUW Statute. Carrying an unloaded firearm, with loaded magazines accessible, inside your fully enclosed center console would exempt you from the UUW charge.

****IMPORTANT****

1) Transporting an unloaded firearm inside a center console does not exempt you from a Wildlife Code violation, as the case is not specifically designed to house a firearm. It has been argued by some LEO and SA's that the IL "complied" statutes allows for a WC violation (misdemeanor). So, if you choose to do this, although you would not face a felony charge, you may become a test case for a WC violation (assuming you are not engaged in hunting/fishing ect...).

2) If you open the center console while not on your own property, or property which you would be legal to possess an uncased firearm, YOU WOULD BE COMMITTING UUW!

IMHO, a much better (and more practical) way to "transport" a firearm in your vehicle, or on your person, would be to use a case designed to house a firearm, that also allows access to the firearm (i.e. CCW fanny pack or Maxpedition Versi Pack). Again, the firearm must be unloaded and fully enclosed, but you could have the loaded magazine in the same compartment.

For more information -

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/1-154.pdf

isp2605 02-15-2010 18:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05FLHT (Post 14630081)
1) Transporting an unloaded firearm inside a center console does not exempt you from a Wildlife Code violation, as the case is not specifically designed to house a firearm. It has been argued by some LEO and SA's that the IL "complied" statutes allows for a WC violation (misdemeanor). So, if you choose to do this, although you would not face a felony charge, you may become a test case for a WC violation (assuming you are not engaged in hunting/fishing ect...).

Actually a person would not be a test case. It's already been tested and upheld by the courts all over the state numerous times every year. Uncased gun even while not engaged in hunting is a fairly common charge.

MakeMineA10mm 02-15-2010 20:16

isp is certainly correct, although I think it's a stupid, chincy, non-sensical type of charge. I had a buddy once who was out shooting clay birds in his backyard range (on his own property) with a Win 1200 Defender (8-shot mag), and a Consvtn. Ofcr. came out of the woods and wrote him a ticket for having an unplugged shotgun in the field during hunting season. Clearly, my buddy wasn't hunting and was even on his own property and the case of clay birds (or what was left of it) and the pigeon thrower were there.

This was totally legal, because conservation officers do not have to respect private property when they are enforcing conservation laws...

I have a problem with a conservation officer (or a state's attorney) using this technically legal application of the law for something it obviously was not intended for... This kind of silliness/abuse of power is what gets the anti-govt./conspiracy theory/militia-movement/KKK/American Nazi Party/World Church of the Creator whackos all fired up with their anti-govt. speech. (Of course, it gives them credibility [which they don't deserve], because in this case they are right...) Every time a State's Atty. "wins" a case based on conservation law where it really shouldn't be applied is not really a "win"...

isp2605 02-15-2010 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by MakeMineA10mm (Post 14765661)
isp is certainly correct, although I think it's a stupid, chincy, non-sensical type of charge. I had a buddy once who was out shooting clay birds in his backyard range (on his own property) with a Win 1200 Defender (8-shot mag), and a Consvtn. Ofcr. came out of the woods and wrote him a ticket for having an unplugged shotgun in the field during hunting season.

He should have taken that one to court. Some CPOs tend to be a bit overboard.
Here's another CPO story.
My brother use to be a buckskinner of sorts when he was really getting into blackpowder hunting. Made his clothes and all his gun accessories including gun case. He'd made a real nice case out of deer skin with the fringe and bead work. It completely covered the gun and the end was made to tie to close the case. DNR was running a check near where he was deer hunting and he was stopped coming home. The CPO wrote him a ticket for uncased gun because she said it wasn't a factory made case. He fought the ticket. I went to court just to see what the judge would say. The CPO got on the stand and said the case wasn't a factory made therefore it wasn't legal. She said when the statute said "specifically made for a firearm" that it meant factory made. The judge wasn't happy with that testimony. No where has the law stated the case had to be factory made. Brother didn't even have to testify. Judge gave a directed verdict and explained his ruling to the CPO. Afterwards I talked to a buddy who was legal counsel for DNR about her testimony. He assured me their CPOs are not taught cases have to be factory made. He contacted the CPO chief and they got it straightened out with their CPOs.
DNR has some really good CPOs. I've worked with quite a few of them and some are very good friends. I've also worked with some who are way way overboard on what they think and do.

volsbear 02-16-2010 08:04

http://www.pjstar.com/news/x59307674...eoria-gun-case

As it's been said, this doesn't exempt you from the Wildlife Code.

MakeMineA10mm 02-16-2010 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by isp2605 (Post 14765787)
He should have taken that one to court. Some CPOs tend to be a bit overboard.
Here's another CPO story.
My brother use to be a buckskinner of sorts when he was really getting into blackpowder hunting. Made his clothes and all his gun accessories including gun case. He'd made a real nice case out of deer skin with the fringe and bead work. It completely covered the gun and the end was made to tie to close the case. DNR was running a check near where he was deer hunting and he was stopped coming home. The CPO wrote him a ticket for uncased gun because she said it wasn't a factory made case. He fought the ticket. I went to court just to see what the judge would say. The CPO got on the stand and said the case wasn't a factory made therefore it wasn't legal. She said when the statute said "specifically made for a firearm" that it meant factory made. The judge wasn't happy with that testimony. No where has the law stated the case had to be factory made. Brother didn't even have to testify. Judge gave a directed verdict and explained his ruling to the CPO. Afterwards I talked to a buddy who was legal counsel for DNR about her testimony. He assured me their CPOs are not taught cases have to be factory made. He contacted the CPO chief and they got it straightened out with their CPOs.
DNR has some really good CPOs. I've worked with quite a few of them and some are very good friends. I've also worked with some who are way way overboard on what they think and do.

Yeah, that's been my exact experience too. The overzealous ones give all the rest a bad name, of course...

8-Ball 02-18-2010 01:09

Anyone have a link to the actual law about this center console thing? I'd like to look it over.

SIUC4 02-18-2010 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by 8-Ball (Post 14781187)
Anyone have a link to the actual law about this center console thing? I'd like to look it over.

Look at post number 2

MakeMineA10mm 02-18-2010 22:46

8-ball,
There is NO legislation on this issue. This stems from an ILLINOIS Supreme Court ruling issued late last year (2009) on a case out of Peoria County wherein a man was arrested, charged, and convicted of UUW (Unlawful Use of Weapons) for having a gun in the center console of his car. He was convicted, and after his sentence was pretty much over, he finally got in front of the I.S.C. and they reversed the conviction.

Some MAJOR aspects of their ruling that are almost never stated are:

To qualify as "a case," the center console must lock,
The gun still must be unloaded,

And, this only applies to the UUW statute. If you have the gun in the center console, you can still be charged with a wildlife code violation for having the gun "accessible."

For Concealed Carry to work in IL., there's going to have to be several laws revised...

MakeMineA10mm 02-18-2010 22:50

Here's a pretty good review of the issue with citation:

http://legaldefenders.blogspot.com/2...-illinois.html

SIUC4 02-18-2010 23:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by MakeMineA10mm (Post 14787746)
Here's a pretty good review of the issue with citation:

http://legaldefenders.blogspot.com/2...-illinois.html

There are a few too many errors in this blog, and this is a blog, not legal legislation, and there is actually legislation on this matter, coming from the afore mentioned supreme court ruling...I have many LEO buddies in states such as GA and TX and they all laught at the fact that the LEOs here in IL are worried about more danger...

volsbear 02-19-2010 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIUC4 (Post 14787934)
There are a few too many errors in this blog, and this is a blog, not legal legislation, and there is actually legislation on this matter, coming from the afore mentioned supreme court ruling...I have many LEO buddies in states such as GA and TX and they all laught at the fact that the LEOs here in IL are worried about more danger...

You are ill-informed. There is NO statute in Illinois regarding guns that specifically references "center consoles." You won't see it which is why you can't find it (that, and because you are asking other members of this thread to do the work so that you don't have to :) ). The Supreme Court decision that has been given to you (a few times now) contains CASE LAW. You should take a few minutes to review what case law is and how it affects the application of the law on the street.

What has been said to you, a few times now, is that Illinois law requires firearms to be secured in a case during transportation to avoid prosecution until the UUW law. The Illinois Supreme Court recently ruled that in some cases, many types of "center consoles" meet the requirements established in the "closed case" mandate under the law. But in many cases, a firearm transported in a center console may not be sufficient to protect you from prosecution under the Wildlife Code which has somewhat different requirements.

Now, in the next legislative session, you MAY see language pop up in a bill with the words "center console" because of the recent decision. But as of yet, no such language exists.

MakeMineA10mm 02-19-2010 07:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIUC4 (Post 14787934)
There are a few too many errors in this blog, and this is a blog, not legal legislation, and there is actually legislation on this matter, coming from the afore mentioned supreme court ruling...I have many LEO buddies in states such as GA and TX and they all laught at the fact that the LEOs here in IL are worried about more danger...

Well, the blog I posted above gave a nice synopsis, which is why I posted it. There are no factual errors in the blog itself, but if you don't trust it, go to a legal library and look up the case as cited at that blog by Supreme Court case number and name...

It sounds like (although not totally clear) that you may be asking about new legislation that is not yet law, but is being proposed in the legislature?? If that is the case, you can go to the Illinois legislature's website and look it up. Most of the proposed legislation is listed there.

Finally, LEOs here in Illinois are worried about this, because this has been an ultra-liberal state for FAR TOO LONG! The restrictions of our rights have been in place so long that even LEOs (typically conservative-minded) have fallen prey to the liberal beliefs and have been taught that you can't trust the population. Then, pundits, media, and police administrators (IACP - who are very political and very liberal-minded, it seems) all say that it would be dangerous to have guns in LOCKED center consoles and you get more of this feeling. So, yeah, misinformed/brainwashed LEOs are worried about this.

THIS LEO is NOT! Concealed Carry lowers crime. Concealed Carry holders are extremely rarely involved in misbehavior. These are not people we need to worry about. Of course, this center console ruling applies to EVERYONE, not just good folks, so there is a tiny bit of unfortunateness that we can't charge a real bad guy with carrying in the console...

The bottom line that LEOs who are against this are not thinking about is: the bad guys are carrying in their UNlocked consoles, in their pants, in their coats, in their car doors, in their car seats, etc., etc., etc. - so legislation or supreme court rulings mean nothing to them and the danger an LEO should worry about is already there, and allowing good people to carry adds nothing to an LEOs worries.

Logic over emotions...

SIUC4 02-19-2010 12:19

THIS LEO is NOT! Concealed Carry lowers crime. Concealed Carry holders are extremely rarely involved in misbehavior. These are not people we need to worry about. Of course, this center console ruling applies to EVERYONE, not just good folks, so there is a tiny bit of unfortunateness that we can't charge a real bad guy with carrying in the console...

I like where your thinking is on this topic, NOW why can we not get IL Legislation to see that CCLs are not an easy thing to get, the FOID card process is already long enough, and I believe that IL is the only state that require's the use of a FOID...I am leaving this state soon to become LE in Texas....Everytime that you make a traffic stop you must understand that the people are armed...makes you stay and you toes more and not let your guard down...

volsbear 02-19-2010 12:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIUC4 (Post 14790595)

I like where your thinking is on this topic, NOW why can we not get IL Legislation to see that CCLs are not an easy thing to get, the FOID card process is already long enough, and I believe that IL is the only state that require's the use of a FOID...I am leaving this state soon to become LE in Texas....Everytime that you make a traffic stop you must understand that the people are armed...makes you stay and you toes more and not let your guard down...

If you have to ask this question, then you need to spend considerable time learning about, and understanding, Michael Madigan.

isp2605 02-19-2010 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIUC4 (Post 14790595)
, and I believe that IL is the only state that require's the use of a FOID

NJ also has FOID.
At least IL doesn't have firearms registration/license, a pre-purchase permit, inspection of the firearm after purchase, restriction/approval on type of firearm purchase.

Quote:

Originally Posted by volsbear (Post 14790617)
If you have to ask this question, then you need to spend considerable time learning about, and understanding, Michael Madigan.

Right there is the absolute truth. As long as The Sphinx is running the House there won't be CCW in IL. Doesn't matter who gets elected governor.

volsbear 02-19-2010 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by isp2605 (Post 14790654)


Right there is the absolute truth. As long as The Sphinx is running the House there won't be CCW in IL. Doesn't matter who gets elected governor.

Yes, indeed. The only hope Brady would have, if elected, is to veto every single spending bill passed by the house and senate until Madigan and Cullerton call a CCW bill for a vote. And that would take balls of solid iron AND a desire to be a single term governor.

SIUC4 02-19-2010 13:17

Micheal Madigan = Yet another reason that I am leaving this state.....

Ryobi 02-19-2010 13:47

Please. You say the LE in your area don't know the one thing they do know- state law. Other "police friends" you happen to have laugh at other cops for recognizing the potential for increased danger during traffic stops. I think both things happened within the confines of the internet, if at all.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:48.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.