GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-28-2012, 20:15   #1
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Illinois vs Diggins Law or not???

I am seeing this document (Illinois v. Diggins) all over the net, but I cannot locate the statute that makes this case an actual law. This case asserts that a car's center console is a legal carry case for a weapon to anyone holding a legal Illinois FOID card.

http://www.state.il.us/court/opinion...ber/106367.pdf

I recently took at CCW course where I first heard about this case. I just received my Utah CCW permit. As you might consider, I am interested in knowing if this is law or not. A mistake here could mean a Felony Fire arms violation.

So, what is the truth about Ill v Diggins.
It is law? It does not appear to be.
If it is, what is the statute that makes it law? I cannot find it. I am afraid that this information is being spread over the net as if it were settled law. I am not so sure it is.

Looking for confirmation
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 20:24   #2
Boot Stomper
Senior Member
 
Boot Stomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Metro East of IL
Posts: 2,268
Blog Entries: 1
I am a Police Officer working in Illinois. A local States Attorney distributed a memo after this case stating the center console is now considered a case. The gun had to be unloaded and inside the case. The magazine can be loaded, but seperate from the gun. That is the interpretation by the local SA.

If you are an Illinois resident you MUST have a FOID card to own or possess a firearm or ammunition..

Here is a link to IL state police.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/transgun0-000.pdf

FOID card information link.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/transgun0-000.pdf


Anyone else with a little more insight please comment.

Last edited by Boot Stomper; 10-28-2012 at 20:45..
Boot Stomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 20:38   #3
isp2605
Senior Member
 
isp2605's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 4,945
There is no "Diggins Law". Diggins is an interpretation of the statute, not a separate statute. What the court did was interpret the IL statute concerning Unlawful Use of a Weapon (UUW), 720 ILCS 5/24-1. The UUW statute says, in addition to other things, that to legally transport a firearm in IL the firearm must be enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container. The court held the center console met the definition of "other container."
Nothing changed as far as UUW still requires the firearm has to be unloaded.
The court's ruling only applies to the UUW statute as that was the only issue before the court. That issue was the UUW statute did not specifically define "case" or "other container". The court held a console could be an "other container.
However, to be in full compliance with all IL laws the firearm still has to be in a case or be in violation of Uncased Gun 2.33(n). 2.33(n) is a completely different statute. 2.33(n) says the gun must be in a case but the difference between the UUW statute and the Uncased Gun statute is the Uncased Gun statute specifically defines a case. It defines a 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 otherwised fastened with no portion of the gun or bow and arrow device exposed."
So what does all this mean? The Diggins ruling did not change the way a gun can be legally transported in the state. If not in a case (as defined by 2.33(n)) and carried in a console then a person can still be charged with 2.33(n) but not with UUW. That's all Diggins says.
__________________
183rd FBINA
isp2605 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 21:13   #4
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
OK, so if the center console is a a legal case, the weapon must also be enclosed within its own case. A case within a case in other words. Is that right?

Odd thing is that several if my Chicago officer friends have never heard of this. This seems to a very well kept secret. Meaning that if stopped and one has adhered to the law as described. If officers are not aware of this, how many people have been or are likely to be arrested for a weapon violation.

This is state wide, right? Chicago is not except, is it?
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 21:30   #5
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boot Stomper View Post
I am a Police Officer working in Illinois. A local States Attorney distributed a memo after this case stating the center console is now considered a case. The gun had to be unloaded and inside the case. The magazine can be loaded, but seperate from the gun. That is the interpretation by the local SA.

If you are an Illinois resident you MUST have a FOID card to own or possess a firearm or ammunition..

Here is a link to IL state police.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/transgun0-000.pdf

FOID card information link.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/transgun0-000.pdf


Anyone else with a little more insight please comment.

I am an Illinois resident who holds a Utah CCW permit. That permit allows me to conceal carry in the state if Indiana, which is only blocks from my home. I am trying to get clear understanding on this center console for transporting my weapon between Illinois and Indiana where I am allowed to carry.

This center console thing is confusing at best. So, separating weapon from ammo, with the weapon unloaded and within its own case, as if I were going to the practice range is the way to go with no complications.

The seemingly conveyance center console seems like a not so clear trip to a fire arms felony charge. My wife would kill me if that happened.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 21:44   #6
Boot Stomper
Senior Member
 
Boot Stomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Metro East of IL
Posts: 2,268
Blog Entries: 1
Chicago is going to be your problem. They make their own gun laws which is why they are always in court. IMO Chicago's gun laws are often unconstitutional. Chicago politicians do not want the residents of Chicago to own any guns.

If you are going to transport a gun in Chicago I would contact a State's Attorney Officer and see what they suggest. After all they will be the one prosecuting the arrest.

Start here:

http://www.statesattorney.org/index2...directory.html


Here is another source You should read regarding Cook County.

http://www.findgreatlawyers.com/Illi...-of-Weapon.htm

IMO you should move. Sorry I'm sure thats not very helpful.

Last edited by Boot Stomper; 10-28-2012 at 21:50..
Boot Stomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 21:53   #7
Boot Stomper
Senior Member
 
Boot Stomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Metro East of IL
Posts: 2,268
Blog Entries: 1
This may be helpful.

If you have been charged with a weapons violation, or if you need further information on obtaining or transporting weapons in Illinois, we can put you in touch with an attorney experienced in Illinois’ weapons law. For help finding a lawyer with this background, please call us at (312) 346-5320 or (800) 517-1614 or fill out our contact us form and we will contact you. Your inquiry will be confidential.

Source:

http://www.findgreatlawyers.com/Illi...-of-Weapon.htm
Boot Stomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 23:31   #8
Boot Stomper
Senior Member
 
Boot Stomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Metro East of IL
Posts: 2,268
Blog Entries: 1
One more thing, GPRUITT54. Base on your avitar, you should take the weed out of your center console.

Last edited by Boot Stomper; 10-28-2012 at 23:32..
Boot Stomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2012, 06:05   #9
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boot Stomper View Post
This may be helpful.

If you have been charged with a weapons violation, or if you need further information on obtaining or transporting weapons in Illinois, we can put you in touch with an attorney experienced in Illinois’ weapons law. For help finding a lawyer with this background, please call us at (312) 346-5320 or (800) 517-1614 or fill out our contact us form and we will contact you. Your inquiry will be confidential.

Source:

http://www.findgreatlawyers.com/Illi...-of-Weapon.htm
No, I have no such violations. I simply want to be armed with the proper information so that does not happen. thanks for the information anyway.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2012, 06:08   #10
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boot Stomper View Post
One more thing, GPRUITT54. Base on your avitar, you should take the weed out of your center console.
LoL! I don't smoke... anymore! Those days are long over for me. I grew up.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2012, 06:12   #11
isp2605
Senior Member
 
isp2605's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 4,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gpruitt54 View Post
OK, so if the center console is a a legal case, the weapon must also be enclosed within its own case. A case within a case in other words. Is that right?
You're not following it.
For the purpose of UUW statute the center console meets that statute's definition for case or other container.
For the pupose of the Uncased Gun statute the center console does not meet the definition of case.
Reread what I posted concerning possible charges. You can comply with the UUW statute by carrying in the console but doing so would not comply with the Uncased Gun statute. 2 separate statutes concerning 2 separate violations with 2 separate elements to the crime.
As far as your "case within a case" nothing says you have to carry the firearm in the console. Carry the unloaded firearm in a case described in 2.33(n) and you'll meet the requirements of all IL statutes.

Quote:
Odd thing is that several if my Chicago officer friends have never heard of this. This seems to a very well kept secret. Meaning that if stopped and one has adhered to the law as described. If officers are not aware of this, how many people have been or are likely to be arrested for a weapon violation.
Why am I not surprised. Tell your "Chicago officer friends" to read the opinion from the IL AG's office that came down within a day or 2 after Diggins was ruled. Maybe then they'll understand it. The information I provided you was from the IL AG.
It's really not that difficult to understand unless a person tries to make it difficult.
__________________
183rd FBINA
isp2605 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2012, 18:17   #12
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
I got it. Seems like it would be simpler and safer to carry the unloaded weapon in my gun carrying case and place it under the back seat of the car while in Illinois.

Regarding the response from my officer friends; there are some parts of some of their responses that seemed almost uncaring about or believe what I was telling them about this. I probably not be talking about this because a couple of these guys are commanders. So I am going to stop here.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2012, 08:09   #13
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,860
I am so glad that I live in VT and not in IL!
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 19:38   #14
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCmasterblaster View Post
I am so glad that I live in VT and not in IL!
Yeah, We can only hope that some day Illinois will change to allow CCW. I assume that one day we will. Until then, I am glad I at least have a CCW permit; all be it a Utah permit, which is honered in Indiana.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 20:18   #15
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by isp2605 View Post
For the purpose of UUW statute the center console meets that statute's definition for case or other container.
For the pupose of the Uncased Gun statute the center console does not meet the definition of case.
I have a CCW license in the state I live. If I travel through Illinois and have my pistol minus magazine in its original plastic case (or soft zipper case) with the loaded magazine in my pocket will I put myself in legal jeopardy?
__________________
Rocket Scientist
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 21:39   #16
isp2605
Senior Member
 
isp2605's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 4,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by unit1069 View Post
I have a CCW license in the state I live. If I travel through Illinois and have my pistol minus magazine in its original plastic case (or soft zipper case) with the loaded magazine in my pocket will I put myself in legal jeopardy?
All IL law requires is the firearm to be unloaded and in a case. Magazines can be loaded. Mags and ammo don't have to be in a case but they can be in the same case as the firearm, just not in the firearm.
IL law isn't as onerous as the internet "experts" post. It's pretty simple. Unloaded and in a case. Do that and you comply with IL law.
There are cities in IL with home rule that have more restrictive laws than state law. You can go to this link and find cities you might travel thru for their city ordinances.
http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/ordinances.cfm
IL law requires all cities who pass firearm ordinances have to notify the IL State Police of those ordinances. The ISP posts them on the webpage.
When you look at the list of cities it's not as bad as one might think. Most of those listed have city ordinances which mirror state law. There are reasons a city would have an ordinance same as the state law. For one, all fines from violating the ordinance go to the city and are not divided up with the county govt. If fined under state law the city only gets a portion of the fine with the remainder divided up with various county agencies. Another reason for a city ordinance is if someone violates a state law they end up with a criminal record. If you violate the ordinance, even tho it is the same as the state law, if charged under the ordinance it's not a criminal record.
Many other of the cities listed have ordinances that do not affect Joe Citizen. Their ordinances are regulating gun dealers such as zoning laws affecting businesses and where they can be located or regulated.
__________________
183rd FBINA
isp2605 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 09:04   #17
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by isp2605 View Post
All IL law requires is the firearm to be unloaded and in a case. Magazines can be loaded. Mags and ammo don't have to be in a case but they can be in the same case as the firearm, just not in the firearm.
Thanks for the info.
__________________
Rocket Scientist
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 09:10   #18
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,860
Better yet

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gpruitt54 View Post
Yeah, We can only hope that some day Illinois will change to allow CCW. I assume that one day we will. Until then, I am glad I at least have a CCW permit; all be it a Utah permit, which is honered in Indiana.
We can hope one day for a national CCW.
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 08:31   #19
Boot Stomper
Senior Member
 
Boot Stomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Metro East of IL
Posts: 2,268
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCmasterblaster View Post
We can hope one day for a national CCW.
Amen!
Boot Stomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:55   #20
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boot Stomper View Post
Amen!
Indeed. I don't have a CCW permit here in VT. VT doesn't issue/require them. One would think that we have a lot of violent crime here - nope!
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions

Last edited by SCmasterblaster; 11-03-2012 at 12:55..
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 23:20   #21
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCmasterblaster View Post
We can hope one day for a national CCW.
If that was going to happen it would have happened with Ragan or Bush. A national CCW would set the states rights crowd hair on fire.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 05:26   #22
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,140
A national CCW might not be exactly what we really need to be wishing for. Suppose it included sign off by a Chief or his designee, a medical certificate, 40 hours of training, and proof of liability insurance... i.e things that the federal government sort of requires now for things they now license or oversee.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 11-04-2012 at 05:27..
Bruce M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 09:02   #23
Gpruitt54
Senior Member
 
Gpruitt54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
A national CCW might not be exactly what we really need to be wishing for. Suppose it included sign off by a Chief or his designee, a medical certificate, 40 hours of training, and proof of liability insurance... i.e things that the federal government sort of requires now for things they now license or oversee.
Good point. A national CCW would come with lots of strings attached.

What is more important is to have all states with CCW to recognize CCW permits of all the states. I think there states that do not recognize the permits of some other states. Not absolutely certain on that, but I think I read that somewhere.
Gpruitt54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 11:47   #24
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 15,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gpruitt54 View Post
Good point. A national CCW would come with lots of strings attached.

What is more important is to have all states with CCW to recognize CCW permits of all the states. I think there states that do not recognize the permits of some other states. Not absolutely certain on that, but I think I read that somewhere.
You are likely correct!
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:33.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,005
266 Members
739 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42